W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2004

RE: simple language testable thing

From: lisa seeman <seeman@netvision.net.il>
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 14:57:24 +0200
To: 'Jens Meiert' <jens.meiert@erde3.com>
Cc: y.p.hoitink@heritas.nl, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Message-id: <002701c3eb1e$72959de0$340aa8c0@patirsrv.patir.com>

OK, I was being ambiguous (or ever just plain incorrect)

Let me try and say what I mean.

Words written in a different alphabet to that of the primary natural
language of the plain are foreign words and should have a translation
provided...

True?

All the best
Lisa Seeman
 
Visit us at the UB Access website
UB Access - Moving internet accessibility
 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jens Meiert [mailto:jens.meiert@erde3.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2004 11:12 AM
> To: lisa seeman
> Cc: y.p.hoitink@heritas.nl; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> Subject: RE: simple language testable thing
> 
> 
> > In Hebrew (for once ) this is easy.
> > A foreign word is written in a different character set.
> 
> CMIIW, but since the UCS (Universal Character Set, often 
> referred to as
> Unicode) is the document character set for HTML/XML, they 
> (foreign words) ain't written in a different character set.
> 
> Again referring to to John (see my last post [1]) I claim 
> this is an issue where unimpaired users are affected as well. 
> Also, I don't see any need for ruling language use by the WAI 
> WG (there already was such a discussion a few months ago [2] ;).
> 
> 
> All the best,
>  Jens.
> 
> 
> [1] 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004JanMar/0169
.html
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2003OctDec/0411.html


-- 
Jens Meiert
Interface Architect

http://meiert.com/
Received on Wednesday, 4 February 2004 08:09:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:17:54 UTC