Re: Proposal: We need to identify whether a proposed SC applies broadly

I still find it most difficult to find the last versions of things. 

Thanks for letting me know. 
g 

Gregg C Vanderheiden
greggvan@umd.edu




> On Jun 9, 2017, at 3:38 AM, lisa.seeman <lisa.seeman@zoho.com> wrote:
> 
> The word clear and simple were removed from the last version 
> 
> All the best
> 
> Lisa Seeman
> 
> LinkedIn <http://il.linkedin.com/in/lisaseeman/>, Twitter <https://twitter.com/SeemanLisa>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---- On Sun, 26 Mar 2017 17:38:00 +0300 Gregg C Vanderheiden<greggvan@umd.edu> wrote ----
> 
> Hi Jim,
> 
> Although I worry that this text still uses words like clear and simple that are not measurable….
> 
> regarding your concern,  it is important to note that this text appears to be restricted only to instructions labels navigational elements and error messages. It does not talk about the content of the page at all.
> 
> You wrote: 
> Most of the words are not testable, and as a result the scope is indeterminate. What is clear and simple to a physicist would not be for most laypersons.    But if you restricted content on the web to all text which is not understandable to most laypersons, then we would have to remove all medical, legal, ethical, logic,, poetry, academic, etc. text from the web.
> 
> 
> Gregg C Vanderheiden
> greggvan@umd.edu <mailto:greggvan@umd.edu>
> 
> 
> 
> On Mar 24, 2017, at 6:02 AM, Smith, Jim <smithjs@atos.net <mailto:smithjs@atos.net>> wrote:
> 
> All,
> 
> The scope of the plain language SC is as follows:
> 
> "Provide clear and simple language in instructions, labels, navigational elements, and error messages which require a response to continue,...."
> 
> The technical content of a journal is out of scope for this SC.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Jim
>