From: lisa.seeman [mailto:lisa.seeman@zoho.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2017 1:35 PM we have at working draft semantics for personlization like coga-action and coga-easylang that would alow people to conform to the plain language proposal via personlization ( see https://w3c.github.io/personalization-semantics ) I understood from this group that they do not want to rely on this for conformance, however with the plain language sc as written you can either change the text or use the personlization semantics. In other words the free speach is not an issue [Jason] It remains an issue if you can’t express what you want to express at all within the restricted vocabulary. I don’t think the concern regarding free speech was so much about changing the default version of the content as it was a more fundamental point about not being able to (1) comply with a controlled/restricted vocabulary and (2) express what one wants to – even if the restrictions only operate with respect to labels, instructions, etc. Whether the “plain language” text is presented by default, embedded in metadata or provided as a link to a separate resource doesn’t address this issue. Those who expressed the concerns will doubtless correct me if I’m misinterpreting their point here. ________________________________ 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 Tuesday, 16 May 2017 20:53:11 UTC