Re: Stem consistency proposals

Hi Jan,

I think we are thinking along the same lines.

There were several sections that worked as unambiguous noun phrases and 
I left them that way (1.3, 1.5, 1.10, 2.2, 2.9, 2.10). There were 
several sections that had a mix but worked as unambiguous noun phrases 
and I changed several titles to make them consistently noun phrases 
(2.4, 2.11, 2.12, 3.2). There were 11 sections that had a mix and I 
changed a few titles to make them consistently verb phrases. I think 
this was best in terms of clarity and ambiguity and in most cases this 
made for the fewest changes.

There was one section that was consistently noun phrases, but I thought 
it was ambiguous enough that they should be changed to verb phrases 
(2.7). In this case I also provided a noun phrase alternative in the 
third column, with only one change for clarity.

There was one section that only had one SC that was a verb phrase that I 
provided an alternative noun phrase for as well (2.9).

Here's what I see as the balance: Verb phrases more clearly show point 
of view, and so are sometimes clearer, but can be longer. Noun phrases 
are often more succinct, but can be ambiguous.

So when the SC's under a given guideline are very consistent, we might 
be able to get away with noun phrases, because the whole thing is fairly 
clear anyway. For instance, with Guideline 1.5  "Provide volume 
configuration" every guideline is about the user agent providing some 
kind of volume configuration.

But Guideline 1.1 "Provide access to alternative content", is much less 
consistent. So "Size and position of time-based media alternatives" 
doesn't tell you what the user agent is doing versus the user, while 
"Allow resize and reposition of time-based media alternatives" makes it 
clear.

I probably should have had a fourth column with all the title changes 
including the changes-- I think the consistency shows up better that way.

Hope this helps.

Cheers,
Kim

On 9/4/2013 9:23 AM, Richards, Jan wrote:
>
> Hi Kim,
>
> I agree that the stems are inconsistent but I'm not sure about adding 
> verbs (provide, allow, make, etc.) all over the place. And it seems 
> like you're not sure either... e.g., you leave GL1.5 alone.
>
> I wonder if a better style rule might be noun phrases unless there is 
> unacceptable ambiguity. This is what ATAG 2.0 does and also seems to 
> be what WCAG did (e.g. "Turn-off" and "Extend" under 2.2.1.).
>
> -Jan
>
> *From:*Kim Patch [mailto:kim@redstartsystems.com]
> *Sent:* September-03-13 2:58 PM
> *To:* User Agent Working Group
> *Subject:* Stem consistency proposals
>
> A spreadsheet is attached with proposed title changes to SC  titles to 
> make them clear, consistent within each section, and to make sure 
> every title is from the user agent point of view.
>
> Cheers,
> Kim
>
> -- 
> ___________________________________________________
>
> Kimberly Patch
> President
> Redstart Systems, Inc.
> (617) 325-3966
> kim@redstartsystems.com <mailto:kim@redstartsystems.com>
>
> www.redstartsystems.com <http://www.redstartsystems.com>
> - making speech fly
>
> Blog: Patch on Speech
> +Kim Patch
> Twitter: RedstartSystems
> www.linkedin.com/in/kimpatch <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kimpatch>
> ___________________________________________________
>

-- 
___________________________________________________

Kimberly Patch
President
Redstart Systems, Inc.
(617) 325-3966
kim@redstartsystems.com

www.redstartsystems.com <http://www.redstartsystems.com>
- making speech fly

Blog: Patch on Speech
+Kim Patch
Twitter: RedstartSystems
www.linkedin.com/in/kimpatch <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kimpatch>
___________________________________________________