Re: XAUR - Advice on language for Symbol Sets vs AAC

Yes, I agree that the phrase "symbol sets" is the most commonly used terminology in the AAC realm. That was quite clear from my research. I don't see an issue with retaining the current language we have.

--Steve




Steve Noble
Instructional Designer, Accessibility
Psychometrics & Testing Services

Pearson

502 969 3088
steve.noble@pearson.com<mailto:steve.noble@pearson.com>

[https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/xFjftXlwMzpdFeTtDgc4_IwyMYm8ThtQHIsgElkS8fyiCO2M7ZM0WaO7r2uy-bmKAe5S2sIcg7d-mwbD4ArkJhyafHke-SgJ2ui8DoGoBhZw4YIyWeK3LUozNMwBff4JR2tdu8nZ2fvoNvkkA06KNw9-s3P9UvYsHSTphHss6X0=s0-d-e1-ft#http://accessibility4school.pearson.com/access/4c49fe02-e204-46b4-b6f0-82f5a3f159cb/pearson-accessibility.jpg]


________________________________
From: Steve Lee <stevelee@w3.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 2, 2020 7:27 AM
To: Joshue O Connor <joconnor@w3.org>
Cc: Noble, Stephen <steve.noble@pearson.com>; RQTF <public-rqtf@w3.org>
Subject: Re: XAUR - Advice on language for Symbol Sets vs AAC

The response form someone on the TF wo  has deep experience in AAC and
symbols was

"Symbol libraries are what graphic designers and computer scientists
might have and AAC users have symbol sets"

Steve

On 02/04/2020 09:44, Joshue O Connor wrote:
> Steve Lee wrote on 02/04/2020 09:26:
>> Steve
>>
>> That's a interesting idea but I suspect only has minority recognition
>> in the AAC Domain.
>>
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_w3c_apa_issues_69-23issuecomment-2D607376676&d=DwIC-g&c=0YLnzTkWOdJlub_y7qAx8Q&r=e0Vlq1-H9s-GydHZ8dXqhyYdB-jv9NvThaezSlozh9I&m=J6G02abpz7Om9lnfRoL4HXVZABM0a1Eun03E4r1zGGE&s=3Va3L6vrGOiQ2p4yISKr_DtDKyw6LnbqVMzEiCekEXE&e=
>
> Thank you Steve 1!
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> On 01/04/2020 22:24, Noble, Stephen wrote:
>>> Hey Josh,
>>>
>>> I just thought I would add a quick observation on your question.
>>> After doing a bit of searching in websites and journal articles that
>>> deal with AAC, I have found that the phrase "symbol set" or "symbol
>>> sets" is a fairly common way to refer to a collection of symbols used
>>> for AAC purposes. However, I also found that the phrase "symbol
>>> libraries" (especially in plural form) is also used, but "set" or
>>> "sets" seems to be more commonly used by AAC professional groups like
>>> ASHA. But that may be more of an American perspective. In conclusion,
>>> I would just say that if we wanted alternate language if we used
>>> "library" or "libraries" I think people would still know what we are
>>> talking about.
>
> Also thanks Steve 2! This has been an interesting issue for sure. II
> tend to agree with Steve 1, and the term Symbols sets may have wider
> traction and recognition. It's always interesting when we find a gotcha
> in language due to domain cross over.
>
> Thanks both.
>
> Josh