- From: Sharron Rush <srush@knowbility.org>
- Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 10:45:28 -0500
- To: "Green, James" <jgreen@visa.com>
- Cc: wai-eo-editors <wai-eo-editors@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CA++nJxrpF0+ZSOFMWut3xq9XNR9V-v3Z8LG4n+Oq+sRT2PkF5Q@mail.gmail.com>
James, Please see how your suggestion was implemented. We will point all editor's to this and emphasize the approach at the EO meeting. Does that seem adequate? https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/EOWG_Participation_Info#Editors: Best, Sharron On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 8:49 AM, Sharron Rush <srush@knowbility.org> wrote: > Thanks James, > > Excellent suggestions, we will discuss at our planning meeting this > morning and make changes to the Editor's Guide, the style guide and post to > the list as well. > > Thanks! > Sharron > > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 7:49 PM, Green, James <jgreen@visa.com> wrote: > >> To follow up with another thread to keep conversations on target… >> >> Shawn, I'm glad you sent out the Intro to Accessibility draft >> <https://w3c.github.io/accessibility-intro/> so early because based on >> the edits I saw, it may be possible that we are not *at all *on the same >> page with regards to exactly how much we should be *simplifying* and >> *tersifying* our documents. >> >> You did remove 2 unnecessary sections, but otherwise only removed about >> 10 words, added about 80, and actually *raised* the reading level a tiny >> bit. >> >> I was hoping you were just cleaning up grammar etc. on a doc that you >> didn't intend to actually edit down because I left it out of the IA I sent >> out before I went on vacation, suggesting that it can stay where it is and >> we should put our effort into https://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/accessibility. >> >> Unfortunately, your issues on github make me unsure. Again, I suggested >> we leave https://www.w3.org/standards/webdesign/accessibility alone >> and add any good stuff from it to https://www.w3.org/WAI/intr >> o/accessibility after we cut that one down by about half. >> >> Let's talk through this! >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> James >> >> >> >> From: James Green <jgreen@visa.com> >> Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 at 7:44 PM >> To: Sharron Rush <srush@knowbility.org>, Eric Egert <ee@w3.org> >> Cc: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>, wai-eo-editors <wai-eo-editors@w3.org> >> Subject: Re: [style guide] Tone section >> >> Hey Shawn, to help me try to get on board, could you please share your >> reasons for having issue with 10th grade reading level? I included a >> testable guideline (more lax than AAA's 9th grade requirement) because >> without that, each editor must decide what "plain language" means. >> >> Given that one of our 3 primary goals is to reduce the "wall of text >> effect", It seems fair to ask people to run the current pages and their >> resulting drafts through a Readability Test Tool >> <https://www.webpagefx.com/tools/read-able/> as part of their analysis. >> Will they hit 9th or 10th grade every time? No, but it can help them >> decide if they are done *simplifying*. Maybe it was Grade 17, but they >> got it down to 12? Also, readability testing tools provide stats like >> number of words and sentences, meaning their use can also help editors see >> if they made much progress at *tersifying*. >> >> To add clarity to my perspective, in the July 7 Survey >> <https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35532/EO-Weekly-7-Jul-2017/>, many of my >> comments were added to the style guide, but the following was not*: "This >> needs to be mentioned … so editors are clear that their primary job is to >> try to cut half of the sentences and half of the words…" >> >> A couple notes on that: >> >> - *I don't expect that phrase to be added to the style guide, but I >> do want some kind of CLEAR communication of what we are really trying to do >> so we get consistent results that make a difference. >> - I said "try to cut" not "must cut" since we have to do what works, >> but we need a goal to start with. >> - It's not just a normal style guide for writing new content, but an *editor's >> guide for cutting down text*. >> - The style guide is well written and actually quite readable, but >> there's so much there, I don't think any of us could succinctly summarize >> the main goals if asked. If we can't do that, we can't keep them in our >> heads while editing. >> >> I think we need to be able to keep a summary of the style guide in our >> heads while editing. Perhaps we put a summary at the top that reads >> something along the lines of: >> >> *Editors, these are your goals (in order of importance):* >> >> 1. *SIMPLIFY & TERSIFY: *Make content as simple and brief as >> possible. Cut words! Cut Sentences! Cut comma separated lists! Check with a Readability >> Test Tool <https://www.webpagefx.com/tools/read-able/>. >> 2. *BULLETS & GRAPHICS: *Break up passages when possible and >> appropriate. Cut 1000 words and then make them a picture ;) >> 3. *FRONT LOADED ACTION!: *Put actions at the beginning of sentences, >> use active voice, and action statements! >> 4. *VOICE & TONE:* Voice and tone will vary, keep in mind for your >> document >> 5. *SPELLING & PUNCTUATION:* Follow WAI style guide for punctuation, >> spelling, grammar, etc. >> >> Sorry if I seem to be holding us back at the style guide when everyone >> want to move on to editing, but I'm pressing these points because I think >> EO needs to get the style guide right and everybody be clear if this huge >> effort is going to be worth our time. >> >> >> Regards, >> >> James >> >> >> From: Sharron Rush <srush@knowbility.org> >> Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 at 10:34 AM >> To: Eric Egert <ee@w3.org> >> Cc: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>, wai-eo-editors <wai-eo-editors@w3.org>, >> James Green <jgreen@visa.com> >> Subject: Re: [style guide] Tone section >> >> Great idea Eric, please do add that link, thanks! >> >> On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Eric Eggert <ee@w3.org> wrote: >> >>> On 25 Jul 2017, at 17:23, Sharron Rush wrote: >>> >>> yes, fine with me for you to make that change >>>> >>> >>> +1, maybe link to Understanding SC 3.1.5 as we’re striving for WCAG AAA >>> where possible and there are some good techniques in there to make texts >>> simpler. >>> >>> https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/meaning-supplements.html >>> >>> (Of course it will be hard to always conform to this SC due to the >>> technical nature of our content, but let’s include it as our North Star, so >>> to speak…) >>> >>> Eric >>> >>> >>>> On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 10:21 AM, Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> Thanks for the tersification, James & Sharron! >>>>> >>>>> I'm not sure about "with a reading level on average of 10th grade." >>>>> >>>>> Some issue around that, but I don't think it's high priority right now. >>>>> Are you OK if we leave that out for now (and leave "use plain >>>>> language"), >>>>> and if folks feel strongly about it, we can revisit it later? >>>>> >>>>> ~Shawn >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 7/13/2017 12:28 PM, Sharron Rush wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Updated Tone section and added the example in the Editorial section. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks James! >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org <mailto: >>>>>> shawn@w3.org>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On 7/2/2017 1:22 PM, Sharron Rush wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I removed this ''[@@ to do: tersify this paragraph]'' note >>>>>> from >>>>>> the paragraph as I reviewed it, tried a few things, and finally >>>>>> decided to >>>>>> leave as is. Tone is a subtle thing to consider and all of the >>>>>> elements >>>>>> referenced seem important to help us all arrive at an appropriate >>>>>> tone for >>>>>> the variety of docs. OK with everyone? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> James in <https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wb >>>>>> s/35532/EO-Weekly-7-Jul-2017/ >>>>>> results#xq6 <https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wb >>>>>> s/35532/EO-Weekly-7-Jul-2017/ >>>>>> results#xq6>>: >>>>>> >>>>>> [I feel strongly about the following] >>>>>> >>>>>> I think the style guide needs to add strong preference for brevity >>>>>> and use of bullets over paragraphs along with adding some visual >>>>>> content as >>>>>> appropriate. This needs to be mentioned specifically in a new section >>>>>> so >>>>>> editors are clear that their primary job is to try to cut half of the >>>>>> sentences and half of the words while adding some visual content to >>>>>> create >>>>>> visual anchors and break things up more. (Remember the 3 issues this >>>>>> project is tackling are the out-of-date visual design, findability, >>>>>> and the >>>>>> **wall-of-text effect**.) The style guide itself, much like many of >>>>>> our >>>>>> resources, tends to try to explain things with many examples, leading >>>>>> to >>>>>> long, wordy, complex, rambling, unnecessarily verbose sentences. >>>>>> >>>>>> >From the style guide: "From Technical Reports and Publications >>>>>> to >>>>>> How-To guides for implementation to documents that help human beings >>>>>> make >>>>>> sense of complex technical specifications, the tone of the >>>>>> presentations >>>>>> may vary considerably. In general WAI documents will have a tone that >>>>>> is >>>>>> welcoming, encouraging, and even inspiring around web accessibility. >>>>>> Materials should educate people without patronizing or confusing them >>>>>> and >>>>>> should be as plain spoken, jargon-free, and straight forward as >>>>>> possible." >>>>>> >>>>>> I applaud the obvious goal of comprehensiveness and clarity, but >>>>>> each >>>>>> of those sentences has a set of 3 comma separated examples. The last >>>>>> sentence has a second set of 3 things for a reader to parse. Less is >>>>>> more >>>>>> when writing for the web. >>>>>> >>>>>> As an example of what I think the style guide needs to communicate >>>>>> about the editing tasks ahead of us, I would rewrite the section to >>>>>> say >>>>>> "Given the various types of documents, tone may vary; however in >>>>>> general, >>>>>> WAI documents will have a tone that is welcoming, encouraging, and >>>>>> inspiring. Materials should be straight-forward, and educate without >>>>>> patronizing, using plain language with a reading level on average of >>>>>> 10th >>>>>> grade." and even use that rewrite as an example of what we want >>>>>> people to >>>>>> do. >>>>>> >>>>>> If we can pull maybe 5 sentences from existing resource and do >>>>>> that >>>>>> to them and include that in the new section, it would help a lot. >>>>>> >>>>>> ### >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Sharron Rush | Executive Director | Knowbility.org | @knowbility >>>>>> /Equal access to technology for people with disabilities/ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Sharron Rush | Executive Director | Knowbility.org | @knowbility >>>> *Equal access to technology for people with disabilities* >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> Eric Eggert >>> Web Accessibility Specialist >>> Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) at World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Sharron Rush | Executive Director | Knowbility.org | @knowbility >> *Equal access to technology for people with disabilities* >> > > > > -- > Sharron Rush | Executive Director | Knowbility.org | @knowbility > *Equal access to technology for people with disabilities* > -- Sharron Rush | Executive Director | Knowbility.org | @knowbility *Equal access to technology for people with disabilities*
Received on Wednesday, 26 July 2017 15:45:53 UTC