- From: Lisa Seeman <seeman@netvision.net.il>
- Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 17:11:02 -0800
- To: "_W3C-WAI Web Content Access. Guidelines List" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-id: <009501c1ba74$a1738640$6b91003e@dev1>
I think this may be worth weighting for before working more on checkpoint 3.3 all the best, Lisa ----- Original Message ----- From: Susanne Bruyere To: Lisa Seeman Cc: es48@cornell.edu Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 4:04 PM Subject: Feedback on accessibility techniques for cognitive disabilities Lisa, We have not forgotten you. I sent your guidelines off to our own staff, and also to four colleagues with expertise in cognitive disabilities (traumatic brain injury) and developmental disabilities. We have been waiting to see if anyone else responded to us. Elaina Sitaras, our Research Assistant, is coalescing these responses for us, and will be sending these off to out tomorrow, from whatever feedback we have gotten. She will also be sending the names and contact information for anyone who has responded, in case you want to get back to them with questions. We hope that this will be of assistance. Susanne Bruyere At 06:24 PM 2/13/2002 -0800, you wrote: That is fantastic, Thanks Lisa ----- Original Message ----- From: Susanne Bruyere To: Lisa Seeman Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 8:27 AM Subject: Developing accessibility techniques for cognitive disabilities Lisa, I am sharing this with several colleagues both within Cornell and the greater "cognitive disability" community, if that's okay. I will try to coalesce responses and get back to you by Friday, if that's okay. Susanne At 09:04 AM 2/13/2002 -0800, you wrote: I have written a draft of the new checkpoint. It needs a lot of work technically (wording and differentiation between definitions and success criteria) but I thought I would ask your opinion before I work on it further as to if you consider it to be as complete as possible. Please not that the other checkpoints such as clear and consistent navigation mechanisms , and use consistent page layout and recognizable graphics and avoid moving, blinking, scrolling or auto-updating objects or pages, or ensure that they can be paused or stopped by the user are still in place. Thanks... Checkpoint 3.3 Write as clearly and simply as is appropriate for the content. Definitions (informative) Clear and simple writing requires planning and work on the level of the document each sentence and individual words. Clear and simple text has been broken up beyond the level requirements by good markup. A clear document has a structured flow of ideas. A clear document provides the flow of ideas summarized in a summary, diagram or page map to help the user orientate themselves within the document. A clear document specifically states each step within the flow of ideas and does not leave stages inferred or implied. A clear document has an easily scanable layout with key information highlighted through presentation and positioning. A clear document contains tools to aid comprehension including: a.. Illustrations:illustrations of instructions, illustrations of flow of concepts, b.. Support of decision making: Provide forms element examples. Provide calculation assistance. Provide prompts for procedures, cues. Support "wizards" which offer help, simplify configuration, and assist with sequences. Structured tasks, cued sequences, and step-by-step instructions. c.. Reduction of decision making: Automated complex sequences like user registration. Reduce the need to calculate Providing forms element defaults and make it easy to re-establish them. Note: Loretta suggests moving this whole "provide additional support " part to an extra checkpoint. I think that that may be wise. A clear paragraph expresses a single idea that can be summarized by its first sentence. A clear paragraph has an easily scanable layout with key information highlighted through presentation, markup and positioning. A clear sentence contains a single point. A clear sentence is as short as can be used to expressed a single point. A clear instructions focuses on concrete rather than abstract indicators using absolute reference controls rather than relative ones. Simple word are words that easily understood. This means that words should be of short and of common usage. Use of jargon may be simple, were as the long term may complicate the sentence (eg: ROM or read only memory) however translations of jargon should be provided with each instance. Clear words can not be misinterpreted by someone who is unfamiliar with the language or can not process metaphorical sarcastic or non literal use of language. Such unclear use of language should be marked as such. Clear words are meaningful and specific. It is sufficient to provide a mode with minimum and clear functionality that eliminates or hides what isn't necessary for completing the site's goals. Success criteria Document: Provide overview For flow: look at overview ( summary, diagram, heading outline or page map)- It is possible to map the document to pieces that are in the summary Highlight key information using markup ( eg headings and emphasis) - when the highlighted text stands alone does it summarize the key ideas. Paragraphs: Short paragraphs - Paragraphs should have with fewer than five sentences . Use lists to break up long paragraphs. can sentences be replaces by bullet points? If so markup sentence as a list First sentence summarizes the point of each subsequent sentence - does each sentence in the paragraph directly relate to the first sentence? one idea per sentence- Test: replace each paragraph with a one idea sentence. Does the document STILL make sense? Sentence: -All: Use short sentences - Write sentences with 20 or fewer words and . Use lists to break up long sentences -can comas be replaced by bullet points? if so markup sentence as a list Sentence -Headings Should be meaningful out of context Headings should be unique Sentence - Instructional It should be possible to identify a graphic representation of an instruction. I.e. you can draw the picture. Each step is clearly stated. You could you represent the flow chart and successfully perform a dry run. Pictorial representation should be provided of each instruction Use active rather than passive expressions Sentences contain no more than one relative clause Use goal/action structure for menu prompts. Words: Non-literal text is identified and a literal translation is identified - test by literal translating to another language and re- literal translating back. Does it make sense? Jargon that is expected should be linked to a glossary / explanation. Use simple words: Substitute 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. Words - anchors (links) hypertext anchors should be meaningful out of context Forms All form elements should have a default or example provided calculations should be performed automatically (eg severside) Provide definite feedback cues Use a two-step "select and confirm" to reduce accidental selections. (IE nothing happens when an option is selected until a confirm/go/OK button is clicked) Susanne M. Bruyère, Ph.D., CRC, Director Program on Employment and Disability Cornell University School of Industrial & Labor Relations-Extension Division Ithaca, New York 14853-3901 USA Telephone: (607)255-7727 Fax: (607)255-2763 TTY/TDD: (607)255-2891 e-mail: smb23@cornell.edu Website address: http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/ped/ Susanne M. Bruyère, Ph.D., CRC, Director Program on Employment and Disability Cornell University School of Industrial & Labor Relations-Extension Division Ithaca, New York 14853-3901 USA Telephone: (607)255-7727 Fax: (607)255-2763 TTY/TDD: (607)255-2891 e-mail: smb23@cornell.edu Website address: http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/ped/
Received on Wednesday, 20 February 2002 10:18:26 UTC