- From: Léonie Watson <tink@tink.uk>
- Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2018 22:42:16 +0000
- To: Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@levelaccess.com>, Dale Cruse <dale.cruse@gmail.com>
- Cc: David MacDonald <david@can-adapt.com>, "public-silver@w3.org" <public-silver@w3.org>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
There may be a difference between a version written for general consumption, and a version written for a particular audience, but both versions still need to be written in plain language I think. SC3.1.5 (Reading level) probably has the right idea. The Understanding information includes this: "Difficult or complex text may be appropriate for most members of the intended audience (that is, most of the people for whom the content has been created). But there are people with disabilities, including reading disabilities, even among highly educated users with specialized knowledge of the subject matter. So when we ask whether we should write Silver using "plain language", we should try to be clear about what it is we mean. Do we mean audience appropriate content that is readable by everyone in that particular audience (lawyer, developer, etc.), or do we mean jargon and terminology free content? It's also worth looking closely at whether we really do need a lawyer/legal specific version. This post from Government Digital Service (GDS) is an interesting case study: https://gds.blog.gov.uk/2014/07/28/doing-the-hard-work-to-make-things-simple/ I began working with GDS on the Gov.UK platform in 2011, and have witnessed this transformation first-hand many times since then. Without exception it has been well received by lawyers, policy makers, and consumers. Léonie. -- @LeonieWatson @tink@toot.cafe Carpe diem
Received on Wednesday, 14 November 2018 22:42:45 UTC