Re: Chrome, Jargon, and our Audience

Hi Simon,much as is possible.  I think if we define our terms though, thos 
who are less implementation minded can embrace them as long as they are not 
too steeped in development language.


Infact, this is a fine line.  We are developping guidelines not 
specifications which may require a less technical form but nonetheless, we 
also have an obligation to ua developers.  Our audience then is a mix of 
people who design/implement and those who need to verify implementation as
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Simon Harper" <simon.harper@manchester.ac.uk>
To: "WAI-UA list" <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 4:26 AM
Subject: Chrome, Jargon, and our Audience



Hi all,

So it seems to me that our discussions regarding Chrome and Jargon
seem to be intensifying because (as far as I know) we haven't
identified the audience for our document. It seems we are writing for
the general public or a mildly technical audience. It seems to me
that this is a mistake - the audience for these guidelines seem to me
to be Software Engineers and Application Developers. If this is the
case we should use the terminology (this is not jargon) used by the
target domain. If we are going to make a distinction between content
and the tool used to display and manipulate it we should keep to the
terminology of the audience domain and not try to invent our own.

Cheers
Si.

====
Simon Harper
University of Manchester (UK)

Human Centred Web Lab: http://hcw.cs.manchester.ac.uk
My Site: http://hcw.cs.manchester.ac.uk/people/harper/
My Diary (iCal): http://hcw.cs.manchester.ac.uk/diaries/SimonHarper.ics


+----------------------[ NEW &
INTERESTING ]--------------------------------------+
   ASSETS 2008                . 13-15 Oct 2008 . http://
www.sigaccess.org/assets08
+----------------------------------------------------------------------- 
----------+

Received on Monday, 14 July 2008 20:55:53 UTC