Re: 4.1 Rev for TR release

It seems to me that the note to "additional ideas" in this draft is in
error, and in any case does not reflect the consensus of the group. I would
prefer that it was removed, and this section was marked "under construction".
The fact that this is under discussion is reflected by the reviewer's note,
and the additional note simply claims that it is not possible to have success
criteria (which would mean that there is no point in further discussion of
them).

Charles McCN

On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:

>Checkpoint 4.1 Write as clearly and simply as is [appropriate /
>possible] for the purpose of the content.
>
>Reviewer's Note: This item is under discussion. There is consensus for
>the existence of the checkpoint but not for the form of the success
>criteria.  We do not therefore have something for the draft at this
>time.  There is a list below of items that are being explored for
>inclusion either as success criteria or as Advisory Recommendations.
>We are also compliling a longer list (approx 50 items) of different
>ideas that relate to this checkpoint.  Comments, suggestions and
>contributions to the discusssion and work on this topic are welcome.
>Refer to the issues list for more information.
>
>Success criteria
>
>You will have successfully met Checkpoint 4.1 at the Minimum Level if:
>
>*        (Still under construction).
>
>You will have successfully met Checkpoint 4.1 at Level 2 if:
>
>*        (Still under construction).
>
>You will have successfully met Checkpoint 4.1 at Level 3 if:
>
>*        (Still under construction).
>
>The following are additional ideas for enhancing a site along this
>particular dimension:
>
>Note: It is very difficult to determine what makes writing clear and
>simple for all topics. Some content is derived from other sources and is
>copyrighted so it cannot be altered. Some materials or topics cannot be
>communicated accurately in simple language. Also, since some people
>cannot understand the content no matter how simply it is written, it is
>not possible to make any content accessible to everyone. Specific
>objective criteria that could be applied across all types of content are
>therefore not possible. Advisory recommendations are however listed
>below to provide guidance in this area. See also the techniques
>documents for the different technologies.
>
>*        (Still under construction).
>

Received on Friday, 12 July 2002 01:07:33 UTC