RE: Do SCs need to be testable?

I'm fully aware of the COGA task force measures and agree that many can be implemented client-side including the implementation of the text substitution. I also share your reservations about "importance".

When I said that text substitution can only take place in the service I was wrong. What I meant was that, in my view, the responsibility for the provision of that alternate content must lie with the service - the substitution could take place anywhere.

Mike 

-----Original Message-----
From: White, Jason J [mailto:jjwhite@ets.org] 
Sent: 06 November 2015 14:11
To: Michael Pluke <Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com>
Cc: Rochford, John <john.rochford@umassmed.edu>; lisa.seeman <lisa.seeman@zoho.com>; Gregg Vanderheiden RTF <gregg@raisingthefloor.org>; Jim Allan <jimallan@tsbvi.edu>; Joshue O Connor <josh@interaccess.ie>; GLWAI Guidelines WG org <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>; public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org
Subject: Re: Do SCs need to be testable?


> On Nov 6, 2015, at 08:28, Michael Pluke <Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com> wrote:
>
>
> I believe that, if successful, automatic text simplification is by far the most promising approach as we all know that, in reality very few service developers would have the time, skill or motivation to produce alternate simplified versions of their content.

Automatic text simplification is also a hard problem to solve. I expect it to be similar in difficulty to automated translation.
>
> However, I also agree with Lisa that at this stage we cannot focus in on solutions that rely on automated simplification.
>
> In the email that John was quoting from I was just trying to establish where personalization using alternate versions would take place. I expect that the answer must be “in the service” and not beyond it (e.g. browsers cannot do this).
>
In the absence of automated text simplification, I agree. However, the COGA task force has recommended measures other than text simplification, e.g., selectively hiding/revealing elements of the user interface based on metadata that indicates their importance. While I have reservations about this (I think importance is often dependent on the task to be performed and that more complex metadata are needed), it’s clear that such measures can be implemented on the client.

Also, if the author supplies substitutes for certain portions of text occurring in the content, then the substitutions can be made client-side. In this case, the original text and the alternative are both included in the marked up content delivered to the client, which makes the selection according to the user’s personal needs (either the original content or one of the alternatives is ultimately presented to the user).

Some content and application authors may wish to reduce band-width consumption by not delivering alternative content along with the original. Under these circumstances, the entire substitution can be made server-side, provided that the user’s need can be disclosed to the server, but this may not always be desirable due to considerations of privacy.

Thus I think the situation is more complex than you envision and that a variety of transformations can be carried out in the client, on the server, or a combination of both.


________________________________

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited.


Thank you for your compliance.

________________________________

Received on Saturday, 7 November 2015 02:49:51 UTC