RE: REF 3.1 TAKE 2 - Add specificity to required checkpoint.

Bcc'ed to WCAG so they know, moved to the ER group because it is in their
scope (or perhaps that of the AU group. I am not sure who is doing techniques
for evaluation and authoring repair at the moment...)

And yes, it would make a good technique to carry language information in user
dictionaries and be able to work across languages. Some applications, like MS
Office and Apple's mail.app allow for spellchecking to be done according to
the language of a document, which can be changed. I think Word even allows
for setting the language of a phrase in a paragraph, with appropriate markup
and spellchecking happening. I don't know if they manage to export this to
HTML markup, but ion principle it should be very easy.

cheers

Chaals

On Thu, 10 Jul 2003, John M Slatin wrote:

>Home Page Reader supports automatic language detection and switches on
>the fly.  The Window-Eyes 4.5 beta available now does so as well.  I
>would guess that JAWS will do so in the not-too-distant future.  So it's
>becoming more reasonable to ask people to do this sort of markup.
>
>It would be *realy* nice if authoring tools supported this work-- for
>example, if their spellcheckers encounter foreign phrases that are in
>the dictionary, the tool could prompt the user to identify the langauge
>(and could provide a pulldown list of ISO 2-letter codes).
>
>John
>
>
>
>John Slatin, Ph.D.
>Director, Institute for Technology & Learning
>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.ital.utexas.edu <http://www.ital.utexas.edu/>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Gregg Vanderheiden [mailto:gv@wiscmail.wisc.edu]
>Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 11:20 am
>To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
>Subject: RE: REF 3.1 TAKE 2 - Add specificity to required checkpoint.
>
>
>
>This is what we need to discuss.
>
>
>
>Phrases like that are not comprehensible most people who can see either.
>Just like they sound like noise to you, they look like noise to the
>sighted person.
>
>
>
>Just like you can go back and have them spelled and see that they are
>some other language,  the person who reads can stop and look at them and
>guess that they are in another language.    Some people will know what
>these foreign phrases mean.  Others will not.  Some screen readers can
>recognize that these are not English words and look for common foreign
>phrases.  All screen readers could if this was seen as important by
>blind users.   But it hasn't been important enough to date.
>
>
>
>I am wondering if we want to create a requirement for a lot of markup to
>do something that can be done fairly easily electronically.    And if it
>was, it would actually be 1000% more useful since it could also tell the
>90% of the population who don't know what it means even if it was
>pronounced properly, what it means at that same time.
>
>
>
>Don't know though.  Need to think about this
>
>
>
>
>Gregg
>
> -- ------------------------------
>Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
>Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
>Director - Trace R & D Center
>University of Wisconsin-Madison
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On
>Behalf Of John M Slatin
>Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 3:46 PM
>To: gv@trace.wisc.edu; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
>Subject: RE: REF 3.1 TAKE 2 - Add specificity to required checkpoint.
>
>
>
>Thanks for clarifying, Gregg.  But now I have another concern:
>
>
>
>Does this mean that a French phrase like "je ne sais quoi" need not be
>tagged if it occurs within an English sentence? When it's not tagged
>with the lang attribute, JAWS pronounces the phrase like this: Gee knee
>sayze kwoy.  It sounds quite different if it's marked up!
>
>
>
>Here's an example sentence:
>
>There's a certain je ne sais quoi about her, isn't there?
>
>
>
>If you saw this in a print novel, the phrase would probably be in
>italics, the convention in English usage for visually marking
>non-English words and phrases.  An English speaker with good knowledge
>of French *might* recognize "Gee knees sayze kwoy" as JAWS' attempt to
>say "je ne sais quoi," but a non-French speaker wouldn't have a clue.
>
>
>
>John
>
>
>
>
>
>John Slatin, Ph.D.
>Director, Institute for Technology & Learning
>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.ital.utexas.edu <http://www.ital.utexas.edu/>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Gregg Vanderheiden [mailto:gv@wiscmail.wisc.edu]
>Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 3:22 pm
>To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
>Subject: REF 3.1 TAKE 2 - Add specificity to required checkpoint.
>
>It has come to my attention that my note is ambiguous.  I have changed
>it therefore to fix the impression that foreign words are not allowed.
>It was meant to say that they must be marked if they are not in the
>dictionary.
>
>
> REF - 3.1     Add specificity to required checkpoint.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Suggest that we add the following to the end of the first success
>criteria.
>
>
>
>"Foreign words or phrases that are found in standard unabridged
>dictionaries for the natural language of the content do not need to be
>marked.  (For a list of common examples of exceptions for different
>languages, see the W3C-WAI foreign word exception examples listing at
>[insert URL].)"
>
>
>
>Note: these lists do not currently exist - but could be easily generated
>as examples so people would know what we mean.
>
>

-- 
Charles McCathieNevile  http://www.w3.org/People/Charles  tel: +61 409 134 136
SWAD-E http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe         fax(france): +33 4 92 38 78 22
 Post:   21 Mitchell street, FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia    or
 W3C, 2004 Route des Lucioles, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France

Received on Sunday, 13 July 2003 07:23:45 UTC