RE: Please pick an issue paper to review

Hi Chaohai and EA,

Here is my feedback.

*     The first section is supposed to be a "Description of the Technologies". You start it by describing/focusing on the users of it. I suggest you start it with your last two sentences in that section, then discuss the users of it.

*     I know it's important to you that "The terms non-vocal or non-verbal do not really fit the wide range of individuals who are symbol users". However, I don't think you should start by stating what "do not really fit", but instead with what fit. After that, you could explain what do not really fit.

*     IMO, you are assuming a level of knowledge that does not exist within the intended audience. Examples:

o  In the first sentence of the second section, you reference "AAC" without tying it to the first section, and without first defining it or spelling it out.

o  You use terms such as "orthographies" and "diglossia" that I doubt web developers or the lay public would know.  (Perhaps you could define them first, then subsequently refer to them by name.)

o  Your proposed solution of "Using of ontology and Linked Data to enable interoperability of symbols datasets with concept coding framework (CCF)" is, IMO, unclear to an audience not well-versed in your field. (I suggest you first describe what you mean in plain language.)

*     I do not understand what you mean by "Systems are not available for all symbol sets"? What "systems"? Also, why would it be necessary that there are systems for all symbol sets? I think clarification is needed.

*     I don't think readers will understand the relationship between your text "Users are able to read certain websites where word for word translation has been offered but this may not aid reading comprehension of the whole, as symbols offered may have different meanings" and the web address, "", you list after it. What is that relationship? (Also, I'm concerned about the perception we are endorsing commercial entities.)

*     There are long/run-on sentences. I suggest you shorten them to aid comprehension.


John Rochford<>
UMass Medical School/E.K. Shriver Center
Director, INDEX Program
Instructor, Family Medicine & Community Health
Twitter: @ClearHelper<>
[Facebook Button]<>[Twitter Button]<> [WordPress Logo] <>

-----Original Message-----
From: ding c. (cd8e10) []
Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2015 6:37 PM
To: lisa.seeman; public-cognitive-a11y-tf
Subject: RE: Please pick an issue paper to review

Hi Lisa,

The attachment is the issue paper for non-verbal symbols written by EA and me.

Kind regards,

Chaohai Ding

PhD Student and  Research Fellow

Web and Internet Science Group (WAIS)

School of Electronics and Computer Science University of Southampton



From: lisa.seeman []

Sent: 08 June 2015 19:26

To: public-cognitive-a11y-tf

Subject: Please pick an issue paper to review

We each need to take an issue paper, review it and suggest how it can fit into the gap analysis (or at least head the discussion on how it can fit in the gap analysis/ road map)

If you have not yet taken one please take an issue paper from the following list (note I put some things together):

  *   Security and Privacy Technologies<> and Online Safety<>

  *   Online Payments<>

  *   Flat Design<>

  *   User Preferences<>, Adaptable Links and Buttons<>  Personalization<>, adapting content for coga personalization<>

 *   Distractions (when draft 2  is ready)

  *   How to provide graded help   (when ready)

  *   Gathering User Preferences<> and Interoprable preference

Taken issue papers

  *   Web of Things<> (Janina)

  *   Voice Menu Systems<> (debra Dahal)

  *   Symbols for Non-Verbal<> (EA and Choachi)

  *   Numbers and Math<>  (Tony)

  *   Techniques - Lisa and John

Link to the gap analysis:

All the best

Lisa Seeman

Athena ICT Accessibility Projects <>

LinkedIn<>, Twitter<>

Received on Sunday, 28 June 2015 18:06:46 UTC