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

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

From: John M Slatin <john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 09:22:08 -0500
Message-ID: <6EED8F7006A883459D4818686BCE3B3B0F74D1@MAIL01.austin.utexas.edu>
To: "Chris Ridpath" <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>, <lisa@ubaccess.com>, "WAI WCAG List" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

In a few days I will be starting work on General Techniques for
Guideline 3.1. I'll start by combing the WCAG and IG lists for comments
on this one, and talking with colleagues in various modern language
departments here and elsewhere. One important goal will be to come up
with techniques that make sense not just for English but for other
languages, especially non-Western languages. I invite those of you who
have expertise in those languages to share your knowledge and insight.

I'm especially interested in learning about textbooks on writing and/or
other manuals, style guides, etc., for languages other than English.  In
the United States there is a large body of theoretical and practical
research on writing and writing instruction, and there are many
textbooks and guides.  There it will be helpful to locate such things
for other countries and languages-- and important to be mindful of the
limitations, such as languages and cultures where comparable texts
either don't exist or are much less common.

I'm also interested in hearing from anyone who knows of readability
tests for languages other than English. Ditto for plain language
lexicons in languages other than English.

Thanks.
John


"Good design is accessible design." 
John Slatin, Ph.D.
Director, Accessibility Institute
University of Texas at Austin
FAC 248C
1 University Station G9600
Austin, TX 78712
ph 512-495-4288, f 512-495-4524
email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu
web http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility/


 



-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Chris Ridpath
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 8:48 am
To: lisa@ubaccess.com; WAI WCAG List
Subject: Re: [w3c-wai-gl] <none>



> 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 15:44:08 GMT

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