RE: 4.1 latest version

two comments:

1) A controlled language is typically not easy to understand from a human
perspective. Restricted vocabularies tend use be precise but not simple

2)We were saying that Use of ILS (when it is all ready) will be equivalent
to a controlled language - because it achieves the same end: IE it resolves
all the ambiguity in text. Unlike a controlled language, however it does not
use a restricted vocabulary and avoid complex syntax. It let the author
write any way they want, and resolves the meanings in the RDF.

However with your definition of controlled language this would not be
Could we say controlled language or mechanism that resolves the ambiguity?

All the best,

Lisa Seeman

UnBounded Access

Widen the World Web <> <>
Tel: +972 (2) 675-1233
Fax: +972 (2) 675-1195

-----Original Message-----
From: []On
Behalf Of Jason White
Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2003 1:39 AM
To: Web Content Guidelines
Subject: Re: 4.1 latest version

Avi Arditti writes:
 > The irony! You're right -- I should explain ...
 > How about:
 > 2) A controlled language is used (Controlled languages are designed to
 > make documents easier to understand and translate. They are based on
 > natural language, but use a restricted vocabulary and avoid complex
 > syntax. Controlled language standards generally limit words to a single
 > meaning and prescribe their use by part of speech. Much information
 > about controlled languages is available on the World Wide Web.)

This is excellent. The definition presumably belongs in the "definitions"
underneath the success criteria: see checkpoint 1.1 for a suitable model.

Received on Monday, 3 February 2003 05:23:04 UTC