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

Re: [w3c-wai-gl] <none>

From: Chris Ridpath <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 09:47:33 -0400
Message-ID: <016a01c4b12b$30fdb560$b040968e@WILDDOG>
To: <lisa@ubaccess.com>, "WAI WCAG List" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

> I would love to see some tests for clear writing...
>
This is a tricky one. I believe that there are tests for clear writing but,
to be accurate, they require a large amount of expert involvement. There's
also a very basic test, the FOG index, that gives a  rough indication of
writing style. Right now, I'm not sure how we're going to test for this.

I can perceive this requirement, clear writing, as an infringement on a
person's right to freedom of expression so it may be difficult to enforce.

> Not minimizing the real usefulness of this work, a lot of the tests do
> not guarantee conformance or accessibility, but are a useful as a  yard
> stick and as an alarm bell...
>
The goal of the test suite is that it can be used to test HTML content to
see if it conforms to the guidelines. I hope we can come close to reaching
that goal.

Once the test suite is finished, I'd like to challenge authors to create
pages that pass the test suite but are still have accessibility problems.
And challenge authors to create pages fail the test suite but are still
accessible. This process should help ensure the test suite is valid.

> 3, puting the two points together. A sentence that has
> a, a low reading age score,
> b, a low number of conjunctions and comers,
> c, is short
> is probably clear and simple.
>
This seems to be heading in the right direction for it to be testable. But
it would still require an expert to examine the text. Is this the sort of
thing that guideline 3.1 means?

Cheers,
Chris

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <lisa@ubaccess.com>
To: "Chris Ridpath" <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>; "WAI WCAG List"
<w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 7:35 AM
Subject: [w3c-wai-gl] <none>


> Looks like a lot of work Chris
>
> a few comments
>
> 1, I would love to see some tests for clear writing, which for English
> there are a lot. Are you writing them?
> 2, Not minimizing the real usefulness of this work, a lot of the tests do
> not guarantee conformance or accessibility, but are a useful as a  yard
> stick and as an alarm bell...
>
> The best yard stick is still testing your interface with people with
> disabilities. It would be a shame for people to reduce the amount of user
> testing.
> I would like to see something along thoughs lines as a footnote on each
> test page.
>
> 3, puting the two points together. A sentence that has
> a, a low reading age score,
> b, a low number of conjunctions and comers,
> c, is short
> is probably clear and simple.
>
>  Certainly failing these "testable" criteria is a good alarm bell that you
> may want a rewrite. But to be safe, test with users with Learning
> disabilities
>
>
> Keep well
> Lisa Seeman
>
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 13 October 2004 13:48:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:32 GMT