- From: Lisa Seeman <seeman@netvision.net.il>
- Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 11:57:38 +0200
- To: "'Avi Arditti'" <aardit@voa.gov>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
I think we should use wording allow for next generation solutions- as we have done with the other guidelines. This allows full fining the guidelines though other technologies, such as alternive renderings / representation . - In other words we need to say "provide clear content" - providing a simplified version of the text is then providing content. Also using writing is technique specific. Symbols or a supplementary video clip will also fulfill the requirement More generally however, I think the guild line has become too apologetic. we have gone from reviewing all instances of non clear writing to a more a "do what you like" approach. I think we need to make this more like a checkpoint with clear instructions of what to do, but enabling a decision to be made to ignore this instance. The more specific we are, at each level, the better. 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: Avi Arditti [mailto:aardit@voa.gov] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 12:51 AM To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org Cc: Jason White; Lisa Seeman; Lee Roberts; John M Slatin Subject: 4.1 newest version -- resubmitted Apologies, but on the advice of counsel [;)] I withdraw my earlier message and resubmit it with two slight changes: Level 1/Item 2 changes from "sensibility" to "reasonableness" (the first runner-up.) Level 2/Item 10 changes from "desirability" to "improved readability" and is rewritten to conform. (Thanks yet again, John Slatin!!) --------------------------------- As we discussed in the last two meetings, I've made a few edits to the previous version [1] to put this forward for the next draft of WCAG 2.0, and any additional comment. Avi [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2003JanMar/0217.html --------------------------------- 4.1 Write clearly This checkpoint lists ideas to help you review content for clarity. Plain language specialists around the world promote many of these ideas. The following items are not presented as success criteria, however, or as an attempt to impose 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: 1. familiarity of terms and language structure 2. reasonableness of length and complexity of sentences 3. coherence of paragraphs (and sensibility in length) 4. clarity of headings and linked text when read out of context 5. accuracy and uniqueness of page titles 6. care in the use of all-capital letters where normal sentence case might increase comprehension 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 helps convey information 2. length of noun phrases · strings of no more than three or four nouns are easiest to understand 3. clarity of reference with pronouns and anaphoric expressions (these refer back to something already said in the text) · example of potential ambiguity: "Scientists study monkeys. They eat bananas." 4. correct use of conjunction forms and adverbs to make explicit the relationship between phrases or parts of the text · such as "and," "but," "furthermore," "not only" 5. complexity of verb tenses · do the tenses used in a document seem overly complicated? 6. intelligibility of verb phrases 7. familiarity of idioms or slang 8. logic in the order and flow of information 9. consequences of ambiguity or abstraction 10. improved readability that vertical lists might offer in place of long paragraphs of information 11. use of summaries to aid understanding. 12. thoroughness in the explanation of instructions or required actions 13. consistency in the use of names and labels 14. clarity where the document: · addresses users · explains choices and options · labels options to get more information · instructs users how to modify selections in critical functions (such as how to delete an item from a shopping cart) 15. application 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 true: 1. new material is tested with potential users for ease of accessibility 2. a controlled language is used 3. support is given for conversion into symbolic languages ------ For definitions section: Controlled languages use a restricted vocabulary taken from natural language. The purpose is to make texts easier to understand and translate. Standards generally limit words to a single meaning and prescribed part of speech. Complex syntax is avoided. Information about controlled language applications is available on the World Wide Web.
Received on Wednesday, 12 March 2003 05:08:39 UTC