- From: Lisa Seeman <seeman@netvision.net.il>
- Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2003 19:15:32 +0200
- To: "'WCAG List'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> 2) Length and complexity of sentences (guides to clear writing emphasize > shorter sentences, with one idea per sentence, but they also recommend > that writers vary sentence lengths within a document) > 3) Coherence of paragraphs (too much change in topic or references > between adjacent sentences makes text more difficult to understand; > ) I think that the above criteria have lost clarity. Will people know what to do? All the best, Lisa Seeman UnBounded Access Widen the World Web lisa@ubaccess.com <mailto:lisa@ubaccess.com> www.ubaccess.com <http://www.ubaccess.com/> Tel: +972 (2) 675-1233 Fax: +972 (2) 675-1195 -----Original Message----- From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Maurizio Boscarol Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 4:39 PM To: Avi Arditti; WCAG List Subject: Re: 4.1 with more edits Avi: > This incorporates suggestions that Maurizio posted to the list (thanks > again, Maurizio!): I'm happy you found it useful :) I think you made a great work! It's very important the introduction you made: > 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. Good. Just two comments: > You meet Checkpoint 4.1 at the Minimum Level if you review the content > with items such as these in mind: > > 1) Familiarity of terms and language structure > 2) Length and complexity of sentences (guides to clear writing emphasize > shorter sentences, with one idea per sentence, but they also recommend > that writers vary sentence lengths within a document) This is to give rithm and good style to writing, as I know. > 3) Coherence of paragraphs (too much change in topic or references > between adjacent sentences makes text more difficult to understand; > ) Should the lenght of paragraph be addressed by checkpoint 2, rather than by the 'coherence' issue? Something as: (guides to clear writing emphasize shorter sentences, with one idea per sentence, but they also recommend that writers vary sentence lengths within a document; anyway, paragraphs that are excessively long also present a challenge) (..) > 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 languages where this form is best used to convey > information) > 2) Length of noun phrases (strings of no more than three or four nouns > are easiest to understand) > 3) Clarity of reference of pronouns and anaphoric expressions (these > refer back to something already said in the text but with potential > ambiguity [example?]) > 4) Correct use of conjunction forms and adverbs (such as "and," "but," > "furthermore," "not only") to make explicit the relationship between > phrases or parts of the text very good the distinction between 3 an 4: it's more clear! :) Just to be sure to understand the wcag-wg method: shuld we provide in a separate document some example for this checkpoint? I think the scientist and the monkey example should be included!... ;-) Maurizio Boscarol http://www.usabile.it
Received on Monday, 10 February 2003 18:40:43 UTC