W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > July to September 2002

RE: 4.1 proposal for discussion

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 06:44:03 -0400 (EDT)
To: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
cc: "'john_slatin'" <john_slatin@forum.utexas.edu>, "'Avi Arditti'" <aardit@voanews.com>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0208300642580.12688-100000@tux.w3.org>

No, I think it is a success criteria issue. The success criteria (if they are
useful) tell you what you need to have done to know you have passed the
checkpoint. For some checkpoints they may vary according to technology. For
this particular checkpoint I believe they will vary accordin to language
used.

Cheers

Chaals

On Thu, 29 Aug 2002, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:

>Hmm
>
>Is listing language specific methods more a techniques issue?
>
>We do have to make sure our guidelines and checkpoints make sense across
>languages though.
>
>
>Thanks.
>
>Gregg
>
>------------------------------------
>Gregg Vanderheiden Ph.D.
>Ind Engr - Biomed - Trace, Univ of Wis
>gv@trace.wisc.edu
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On
>Behalf Of john_slatin
>Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 3:59 PM
>To: 'Charles McCathieNevile'; Avi Arditti
>Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
>Subject: RE: 4.1 proposal for discussion
>
>
>I agree with Charles-- I think it would be very helpful for us to
>provide
>lists of specific recommended practices, with references to the
>languages
>for which they're suitable.
>
>I'd olke to see those lists in the Advice section, however, with the
>Success
>Criteria stating more general principles and then pointing to the advice
>section.  This is a practice we've followed elsewhere in 2.0.
>
>John
>
>John Slatin, Ph.D.
>Director, Institute for Technology & Learning
>University of Texas at Austin
>FAC 248C, Mail code G9600
>Austin, TX 78712
>ph 512-495-4288, f 512-495-4524
>email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu
>web http://www.ital.utexas.edu
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Charles McCathieNevile [mailto:charles@w3.org]
>Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 2:43 pm
>To: Avi Arditti
>Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
>Subject: Re: 4.1 proposal for discussion
>
>
>
>I am not suggesting that there is a problem of listing things that are
>specific to one language. I think it is sensible to do that. My opinion
>is
>that we should do it, and we should be clear about what languages things
>are
>useful for (so that nobody tries to apply rules for english to hebrew
>where
>they are not applicable).
>
>cheers
>
>Chaals
>
>On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, Avi Arditti wrote:
>
>>
>>Update: I am seeking feedback from a few big guns (non-technical
>>appelation) in the field of plain language and will report back as soon
>
>>as I get answers.
>>
>>The issue in debate is the wisdom of listing elements that might seem
>>weighted too heavily toward one language versus listing universal
>>principles that might seem too weak to enforce across all languages.
>>
>>Any more thoughts from the list?
>>
>>Finally, I would appreciate any help from list members in Italy to
>>translate elements of advice posted at the site for the Italian
>>government's new plain-language campaign:
>>http://www.funzionepubblica.it/chiaro/
>>
>>Avi
>>
>
>

-- 
Charles McCathieNevile  http://www.w3.org/People/Charles  tel: +61 409 134 136
SWAD-E http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe ------------ WAI http://www.w3.org/WAI
 21 Mitchell street, FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia  fax(fr): +33 4 92 38 78 22
 W3C, 2004 Route des Lucioles, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Friday, 30 August 2002 06:44:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:20 GMT