RE: 4.1 latest version

Nice work Avi

   I'm sure there will be some wordsmithing and item moving etc but I think
you have hit the right form for it very nicely.   It doesn't sound like
requirements but it does provide specific guidance as to what is desirable.


 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 

-----Original Message-----
From: [] On Behalf
Of Avi Arditti
Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 12:28 PM
Subject: 4.1 latest version

This recasts the November version* based on the much-appreciated
suggestions, and the reviews of the 22Aug02 working draft.


This checkpoint lists ideas to help you review content for clarity. Many
of these ideas are promoted within the global movement for plain
language. The items below are not presented as success criteria,
however, nor as any attempt to impose a particular editorial style.
Rather, they are elements to consider as you review writing. They
reflect the idea that accessibility begins with understanding.

You meet Checkpoint 4.1 at the Minimum Level if you review the
content with items such as these in mind:

. Familiarity of terms and language structure 
. Length and complexity of sentences (shorter sentences, limited to one
idea, are generally easier to understand)
. Length and complexity of paragraphs (paragraphs limited to one idea
are generally easier to understand) 
. Use of summaries to aid understanding.
. Accuracy and uniqueness of page titles
. Clarity of headings and linked text when read out of

You meet Checkpoint 4.1 at Level 2 if you review the
content with items such as these in mind:

1) Use of sentence structures that increase understanding (such as
active voice in English and other languages)
2) Length of noun phrases (strings of no more than three or four nouns
are easiest to understand)
3) Complexity of verb tenses (simpler tenses are easier to understand)
4) Transparency of verb phrases 
5) Familiarity of idioms or slang
6) Consequences of ambiguity or abstraction
7) Desirability of vertical lists in place of long paragraphs of
8) Logic in the order and flow of information
9) Thoroughness in the explanation of instructions or required actions
10) Consistency in the use of names and labels
11) Clarity where the document:
	- addresses users
	- explains choices and options
	- labels options to get more information
	- instructs how to modify selections in critical functions (such as
to delete an item from a shopping cart)
12) Usage of:
	- proper markup to highlight key information
	- goal-action structure for menu prompts
	- default settings (and the ease in re-establishing them)
	- two-step "select and confirm" processes to reduce accidental
	  selections for critical functions
	- calculation assistance to reduce the need to calculate

You meet Checkpoint 4.1 at Level 3 if at least one of the following is

1. New material is tested with potential users for ease of
2. A controlled language is used
3. Support is given for conversion into symbolic languages

Received on Tuesday, 28 January 2003 14:52:17 UTC