Re: Usefulness of language annotations

Jens O. Meiert writes:
> It’s unfortunate that all feedback so far has been… reflexive, and
> then evasive. I believe there are many problems with that, if not to
> use discussions to clarify guidelines. I don’t follow the list as
> closely anymore, however, to tell whether this is incidental or a
> fundamental problem.
> 

That may be your interpretation, but I cannot agree. My interpretation
is that we've provided substantive reasons. I'm sorry you think they're
"reflexive and evaisive." Might it be that your characterizations are
based on your own value judgements alone?


I'm sorry, but a TTS engine speaking German as though it were English is
unacceptable. Only inline lang can solve the problem reliably. To me
that matters, even if the words on screen look no different.


So, go ahead and go off spec if you think you must. But, that's on your
head alone. You can't blame us for that.

Janina

> Then, I’ve reviewed the case and decided to drop the practice of
> marking up changes in language. I’m certain enough to say that it is
> an unrealistic and expensive demand that should be made a software
> responsibility. It’s not a problem, especially not an accessibility
> one, and overall, software will do better detecting changes than
> humans marking them up. For the moment I will recommend other
> professionals to at least be critical of current guidelines.
> 
> 
> [1] http://meiert.com/en/blog/20140825/html-and-language/#comment-239194
> 
> -- 
> Jens O. Meiert
> http://meiert.com/en/

-- 

Janina Sajka, Phone: +1.443.300.2200
   sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net
  Email: janina@rednote.net

Linux Foundation Fellow
Executive Chair, Accessibility Workgroup: http://a11y.org

The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
Chair, Protocols & Formats http://www.w3.org/wai/pf
 Indie UI   http://www.w3.org/WAI/IndieUI/

Received on Thursday, 28 August 2014 16:34:28 UTC