- From: HowRose <HowRose@aol.com>
- Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 16:28:55 EST
- To: asgilman@access.digex.net, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
In a message dated 98-01-23 16:08:29 EST, asgilman@access.digex.net writes: << The experience I have heard from a linguist is that the most effective approach is not to try to clean up the output to be fluent in the target language. People are very flexible and tolerant of technical errors. The reader can read through that. The first brute force word for word transliteration removes the bulk of the mystery. Polishing after that is past the knee in the curve. >> That may be true of people in general, however, many deaf people use a form of sign language (e.g., American Sign Language) as their first language and therefore are often not fluent with a written language even though the person may have lived their whole life in a country speaking that language. For example, there are many deaf people who have lived in the U.S.A. all their lives and nevertheless do not have a fluent grasp of the English Language but rather utilize ASL as their native language. For these individuals, reading some written language without technical errors is a challenge, and therefore reading a translation with technical errors would likely be insurmountable in terms of comprehension. I state this not to throw a monkey wrench in your efforts to improve accessibility but to make you all aware that there is a significant population of deaf people who have difficulty reading error-free written language let alone technically deficient written translations. Of course, I want to clarify that there are just as many deaf people who will be able to gain sufficient understanding of the message from poor translations, and that no one should have a stereotypical image of the average deaf cyberspace surfer. Just my two cents, Howard A. Rosenblum Attorney, Monahan & Cohen (Chicago, IL) Representative for National Association of the Deaf, Committee on Computing Technology Access The above statements are the opinion of the writer alone and are not intended to be given as legal advice nor representative of the opinions of the law firm of Monahan & Cohen. The statements are given in representation of the general interests of deaf consumers on behalf of the N.A.D.
Received on Friday, 23 January 1998 16:29:29 UTC