Re: plain/simple/easy language variant subtag

Greetings, WAI-IG:

First, a few caveats:
-- I have not been following the discussion closely
-- I am simply sharing information, here
-- I am not involved in "plain language" work; I just know others who 
are. And, of course, it is an area that interests me.

In short, I'm sharing info that may be helpful to those interested in 
the topic, but I'm not able to answer questions. All that out of the way:

I contacted someone who knows about "plain language" because, as I 
skimmed the discussion, I started to wonder if folks in accessibility 
might not be re-inventing the wheel. Note that this information doesn't 
answer the original question; again, I send it to deepen/expand the 
discussion, or at least to make interested folks aware of efforts in 
this area.

Here are some excerpts I received:

1. If they are going to discuss plain language, I suggest that they get 
some of the many international plain language experts involved in the 
discussion.
Plain language, like accessibility, is often part of national 
legislation or regulation. It would be good not to work at cross purposes.
2. I can’t imagine how they would establish the level of language 
regarded as “plain”. ... It’s the language-equivalent of
text only.

JS: Paraphrasing -- focusing on "grade level" criteria is not a good 
idea, based on evidence in the field.

... although this may be a helpful measure for some purposes, it is not 
sufficient to guarantee that something is plain.

The international definition is that information is in plain language if 
people can find what they need, understand what they find, and use the 
information to meet their goals.

A helpful resource is:
plainlanguage.gov

Best,
Jennifer

Received on Saturday, 19 September 2015 19:17:24 UTC