W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2003

Re: 4.1 with more edits

From: Maurizio Boscarol <maurizio@usabile.it>
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2003 15:38:50 +0100
Message-ID: <006201c2ceb6$a77493c0$3e772a97@k7l2g9>
To: "Avi Arditti" <aardit@voa.gov>, "WCAG List" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

Avi:
> This incorporates suggestions that Maurizio posted to the list (thanks
> again, Maurizio!):

I'm happy you found it useful :)
I think you made a great work!

It's very important the introduction you made:

> This checkpoint lists ideas to help you review content for clarity.
Many
> of these ideas are promoted within the global movement for plain
> language. The items below are not presented as success criteria,
> however, nor as any attempt to impose a particular editorial style.
> Rather, they are elements to consider as you review writing. They
> reflect the idea that accessibility begins with understanding.

Good. Just two comments:


> You meet Checkpoint 4.1 at the Minimum Level if you review the content
> with items such as these in mind:
>
> 1) Familiarity of terms and language structure
> 2) Length and complexity of sentences (guides to clear writing
emphasize
> shorter sentences, with one idea per sentence, but they also recommend
> that writers vary sentence lengths within a document)

This is to give rithm and good style to writing, as I know.

> 3) Coherence of paragraphs (too much change in topic or references
> between adjacent sentences makes text more difficult to understand;
> )

Should the lenght of paragraph be addressed by checkpoint 2, rather than
by the 'coherence' issue?
Something as:
(guides to clear writing emphasize
 shorter sentences, with one idea per sentence, but they also recommend
that writers vary sentence lengths within a document; anyway, paragraphs
that are excessively long also present a challenge)


(..)
> You meet Checkpoint 4.1 at Level 2 if you review the content with
items
> such as these in mind:
>
> 1) Use of sentence structures that increase understanding (such as
> active voice in languages where this form is best used to convey
> information)
> 2) Length of noun phrases (strings of no more than three or four nouns
> are easiest to understand)
> 3) Clarity of reference of pronouns and anaphoric expressions (these
> refer back to something already said in the text but with potential
> ambiguity [example?])
> 4) Correct use of conjunction forms and adverbs (such as "and," "but,"
> "furthermore," "not only") to make explicit the relationship between
> phrases or parts of the text

very good the distinction between 3 an 4: it's more clear! :)

Just to be sure to understand the wcag-wg method: shuld we provide in a
separate document some example for this checkpoint? I think the
scientist and the monkey example should be included!... ;-)


Maurizio Boscarol
http://www.usabile.it
Received on Friday, 7 February 2003 09:26:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:21 GMT