- From: Lisa Seeman <seeman@netvision.net.il>
- Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 08:43:42 -0800
- To: "_W3C-WAI Web Content Access. Guidelines List" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
OK - Checkpoint 3.3 Write as clearly and simply as is appropriate for the content. I have split up previous work into four categories. -Brake up the text, -chouse the right words -highlight -provide support. I think that the below are testable, even though you can probably fulfill all the test and provide an unintelligible page (if you put your mind to it). That is probably true to some extent in lots of Checkpoints. > 1 BRAKE UP Use a two-step "select and confirm" to reduce accidental selections, especially for critical functions. Structure tasks, cue sequences, and provide step-by-step instructions. One idea per paragraph: Test: replace each paragraph with a one idea sentence. (the first sentence, or a rewrite of that) Does the document make sense still? first sentence must match the (single) idea expressed in a paragraph. (success as above) Use short sentences . Short sentences success criteria proposal: sentences contain no more than one relative clause at least for instructions. Instructions should be step by step, and include visual references. Success Criteria: could you represent the instruction as a drawing - flow chart dry run. It should be possible to choose the detailed or the shortened instructions Use markup to identify flow of instructions provide flow of ideas in a summary, diagram or page map Success Criteria: It is possible to map the document to pieces that are in the summary (exec summary, or heading outline, or ...) Automate complex sequences like system backup, application launch, and user registration. Avoid functions that require simultaneous actions to activate or operate. Use goal/action structure for menu prompts. 2 choose WORDS 2.1 metaphorical language avoiding metaphorical language which may be understood literally by people with autism. If you do use metaphor or irony or another style which may be misunderstood, consider adding an explanatory note success criterion: non-literal text is identified and a literal translation is identified test by translating to another language and re- translate. does it make sense? technique for 3: Use of Ruby. <p> The Prime minister is wanting to <ruby> <rb>have his cake and eat it too</rb> <!-- the metaphorical expression --> <rt class="http://wordnet.org/literally">get the benefit of seeming inflexible now, but be able to change his mind again later</rt> <!-- the rt element can be rendered alongside, or instead of, the rb content, according to the styling --> </ruby> in this instance.</p> 2.2 meaningful words Use highly descriptive words as hypertext anchors. Avoid the "click here" s syndrome. Headings should be unique, and meaningful on their own ( related to the requirement that links should make sense on their own) Jargon that is expected should be linked to a glossary / explanation Use the jargon. This has to be linked to (depends on) 5: and should be linked to 4: I would add that I do not think it ok to restrict translations of jargon and annotations of abbreviations to the fist occurrence. I can not remember annotations that I have used since high school, and am still dependent on the spell checker for ect/etc ....(etc....) Linking to a glossary is not as cool as providing the information in a ruby so it can be shown/hidden fast. ( Technique: Use Ruby Technique: Use a rel="glossary" link.) It should be possible to identify a graphic representation of an instruction. i.e. you can draw the picture. CMN thinks that 10: is also useful for being able to translate to sign language. Use active rather than passive expressions - this doesn't have massive support. 2.3 Easily understood words Use short words in common vocabulary. Success criterion: Substituting common words for uncommon words (without significantly expanding the size) does not change the meaning. Note that this requires a dictionary that marks the "difficulty" of a word. Provide concrete rather than abstract indicators. Use absolute reference controls rather than relative ones. Grammar-based success criteria are language dependent 3 HIGHLIGHT Highlight key information Success criterion: when the highlighted text stands alone does it summarize the key ideas. provide easily scanable layout such as bullets for multiple points. Success criterion: can comas be replaced by bullet points? can paragraph marks be replaces by bullet points? use goal/action structure for menu prompts, 4 AND provide support and help Support "wizards" which offer help, simplify configuration, and assist with sequences. Provide defaults and make it easy to re-establish them. Provide calculation assistance, or reduce the need to calculate.Success criteria Provide definite feedback cues: visual, audio, and/or tactile provide a mode with minimum functionality. - Eliminate or hide what isn't essential. Use prompts for procedures and support decision making. Provide for consistent formatting that doesn't put people off. pictorial representation should be provided of each instruction, (if you can not do it in one picture, it is time to split up the instructions) diagrammatic representation should be provided for relationships and flow of ideas. Supply a page map/ structural diagrams of the flow of concepts through a document. for long documents the subject could be shown at the center, with the various ideas radiating outwards. Branches and sub-branches indicate the hierarchical relationships between ideas, and visual cues are used to associate ideas with easily recalled symbols success criteria: can you map all the ideas in the document to the page map?
Received on Friday, 18 January 2002 01:49:10 UTC