- From: Wendy A Chisholm <wendy@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 13:20:24 -0500
- To: Anne Pemberton <apembert@erols.com>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
what about languages other than English? Do we know of tests to run on written text in Japanese? Chinese? German? Finnish? Spanish? Hebrew? Arabic? How do the tests differ between dialects? Addressing the process used to determine if a site is accessible is very important. When I presented to a group at the U. of Wisconsin a couple weeks ago, they said one of the biggest lessons they learned was about the process that I use to determine if a site is accessible. This includes which tools I use and how I use them and most importantly, what questions do I ask myself as I go through a site. This process has not been documented for WCAG 1.0 and should definitely be part of making the requirements clear for WCAG 2.0. This gets back to a testing checkpoint that Len suggested. Perhaps we list tests that an author or evaluator must run: 1. spelling 2. reading level or grammar check 3. validate syntax 4. lists of questions to ask:... I'm not sure where this fits in. Is it a checkpoint? Is it a technique? Regardless, something like this would be valuable and something I get requests for all the time. Thoughts? --wendy At 05:01 PM 3/14/01 , you wrote: >Kynn, > > I've exerpted from your note to Al: > >At 07:35 AM 3/14/01 -0800, Kynn Bartlett wrote: > >At risk of beating a drum, I really need to emphasize that the above > >description -- which has been used by a number of people to illustrate > >the problem -- is incomplete because it is really only along one > >axis. There are -numerous- reasons to try to communicate, and applying > >a fog index (e.g.) to -every- form of written or verbal communication > >is improper. E.g., editorials, advertisements, parodies, humor, > >fiction, and a vast number of other content types are even -harder- > >to apply such a standard to. > >First of all, Kynn, a reading level index is NOT a fog index. It will not >point out stupid word choices, or unsupported claims. Reading levels are >used in all areas of education, and routinely include parodies, humor, and >fiction. Even advertisements (if they have enough words in them to >measure), have been tailored for young readers as well as their parents and >grandparents... Even the ubitquitous Weekly Reader mags include editorials >and think pieces aimed at children just learning to read. The Reader's >Digest, which is aimed at the average reading levels, has pages of jokes >that can be read without having a sheepskin on the wall! > >Yes, there is a mindset in all this, a mindset that, for me at least >boggles at the resistance to setting a checkpoint that ensures that general >content will be readable by a general audience. Not all disabilities are >aided by the slick "devices" that make the web possible by varying the >presentations possibilities. Sometimes it is the mundane, everyday stuff, >such as reading level and illustrations that carry the day. Never >underestimate the value of getting some mud under your nails ... > > .... From warm and sunny Virginia where the bulbs are > blooming, the temp >is in the sixties and seventies, and the itch to get into the garden is >rampant.... > > Anne > > Anne > > > > > >Anne Pemberton >apembert@erols.com > >http://www.erols.com/stevepem >http://www.geocities.com/apembert45 -- wendy a chisholm world wide web consortium web accessibility initiative madison, wi usa tel: +1 608 663 6346 /--
Received on Wednesday, 21 March 2001 13:08:16 UTC