- From: Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo <emmanuelle@mi.madritel.es>
- Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 17:11:15 +0200
- To: "john_slatin" <john_slatin@forum.utexas.edu>, "'Charles McCathieNevile'" <charles@w3.org>, "WAI GL" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
I agree totally with Charles and Johh, Maybe the following article can help to edit some more appropriate approaches: http://www.plainlanguagenetwork.org/Rapport/rap19.html#FIVE regards, Emmanuelle ----- Original Message ----- From: "john_slatin" <john_slatin@forum.utexas.edu> To: "'Charles McCathieNevile'" <charles@w3.org>; "WAI GL" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2002 4:25 PM Subject: RE: 4.1 success criteria - proposal for division | | Charles makes an excellent point. Perhaps the advice section for 4.1 could | include something to the effect that authors should follow the conventions | appropriate to the natural language of the content. A further point: even | in English, it's not always appropriate to avoid the passive. There are | times when it isn't possible to assign grammatical agency-- especially in | bureaucratic writing. The Section 508 standards would fail this criterion | if we were to insist on it, for example. | | There are implicit cultural assumptions here, too. In the United States, | for example, many people place high value on coming directly to "the point," | both in writing and in oral communication. But in many countries such | directness is considered rude, and in some cases it may be politically | dangerous (which is why satire flourishes under repressive regimes). | | John | | John Slatin, Ph.D. | Director, Institute for Technology & Learning | University of Texas at Austin | FAC 248C, Mail code G9600 | Austin, TX 78712 | ph 512-495-4288, f 512-495-4524 | email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu | web http://www.ital.utexas.edu | | | | -----Original Message----- | From: Charles McCathieNevile [mailto:charles@w3.org] | Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2002 9:05 am | To: WAI GL | Subject: 4.1 success criteria - proposal for division | | | | Hi, | | I think it is important that any success criteria for language use includes | a list of applicable languages. | | For example, there is a proposal not to use noun sequences. In french, one | can reasonably say | | la version du loi de droits de general de gaulle | | (either: General de Gaulle's version of the law of rights, or the version of | the law of General de Gaulle's rights). | | Similarly, it is proposed that verbs in the passive mood be avoided. (I.e. | the last sentence would fail, twice). I don't know if this applies in all | languages. | | If we do not think that a criterion works for a particular language, we | should not say anything. If we think that a criterion does not work for a | particular language, we should say so. I realise that this will leave us | with a weaker list than we might have, but hopefully it will encourage | people with relevant expertise to help fill the list. It will also hopefully | mean we avoid saying things that are wrong and would cause problems. | | cheers | | chaals | | -- | Charles McCathieNevile http://www.w3.org/People/Charles tel: +61 409 134 | 136 SWAD-E http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe ------------ WAI | http://www.w3.org/WAI 21 Mitchell street, FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia | fax(fr): +33 4 92 38 78 22 W3C, 2004 Route des Lucioles, 06902 Sophia | Antipolis Cedex, France |
Received on Thursday, 22 August 2002 11:16:36 UTC