- From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
- Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2001 11:18:15 -0500
- To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Thanks Al, Excellent info. This raises an interesting question for us. If we did have a ruler for complexity of language (one that everyone agreed with) Would we a) Put in a rule that says "go as far down that ruler as you can"? or b) Draw a line on the ruler and say "you must get below that line but don’t need to go lower -- though it would be good if you did"? option (c) -- "you must have content that works for all on the rule" doesn’t work since the rules must go down to 0 to include all. a) takes us back to the problem of 'no clear criterion' b) is what is usually done - but is very hard to do without a consensus rulemaking body. What are people thinking? A? or B? or C? or ?? Gregg -- ------------------------------ Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. Professor - Human Factors Dept of Ind. Engr. - U of Wis. Director - Trace R & D Center Gv@trace.wisc.edu <mailto:Gv@trace.wisc.edu>, <http://trace.wisc.edu/> FAX 608/262-8848 For a list of our listserves send “lists” to listproc@trace.wisc.edu <mailto:listproc@trace.wisc.edu> -----CLIP FROM Original Message----- The idea of grade level as a metric with benefits for accomplishing accomodation of congnitive differences is quite real. We will likely rathole if we try to solve this ourselves but fortunately we don't necessarily have to take that on. There are professionals pursuing this as we speak. This is an area where W3C and the WAI should be prepared to mostly 'follow,' as in "lead, follow, or get out of the way." At least one education targeted activity we can look for leadership from in defining a "cognitive challenge level, comparable to what has been called grade level in the past" is the IMS Project. We are not competitive with that group in taking on this particular piece of work. Jutta and Gregory are working with them on their access metadata schema or vocabulary. Good to check if there is grade level stuff that can be borrowed from IMS in general, or if the access metadata effort has to get that on the agenda. Compare this approach, where there are alternative sites differing in grade level all provided by one authoring activity, with Kynn's concept that keywords (metadata) be used as the means to relate material at one grade level from one source with material at a different grade level from another source. In this case a search or catalog lookup process does the two-dimensional analysis of "same topic, better level" to find resources that the user is likely to find desirable. There is a third approach where one passes a grade level parameter to a Reef style view synthesis processor and for example there are explicit hyperlinks to explanatory resources attached to tough words and sentences for an adapted, appropriate definition of 'tough.' There are inline ways like this to accomplish grade level accomodation, but they tend to involve setting thresholds that govern when one technique is applied vs. another (explicit glossary link vs. leave it to Atomica). And they have limited ranges over which they can accomodate, at the limits of which one has to flop over the phase boundary into a qualitatively different strategy. Al
Received on Sunday, 29 July 2001 12:24:24 UTC