W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > wai-eo-editors@w3.org > June 2017

Re: [style guide] Thoughts on approach

From: Sharron Rush <srush@knowbility.org>
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 14:39:04 -0500
Message-ID: <CA++nJxofNYFxmgiWjihiJzWtGbDy3LrQFhGS7vWQ+1XKdqbFjQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
Cc: wai-eo-editors <wai-eo-editors@w3.org>
Great, thanks for the tersification, always welcome :)

On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 2:36 PM, Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org> wrote:

> [13:58] <Sharron> shawn-charter, can take a look at the tone, voice, intro
> sections and weigh in whenever you wish
> Thanks, Sharron. Indeed I think these add good info to the style guide!
> * Introduction - I made suggested revision to tersify -- and also to
> broaden beyond EOWG - especially since we're doing it as part of our new
> charter deliverable to help AGWG with Understanding. :)
> * Voice - nice!
> * Tone - generally good and very helpful info. I suggest a pass to tersify
> it. /me won't get to that any time soon and hope Sharron or others can.
> Thanks,
> ~Shawn
> On 6/30/2017 12:16 PM, Sharron Rush wrote:
>> Voice and tone are very important and it is the lack of a conssitant
>> voice and tone that often makes EO documents so very hard to consume,
>> creating that "wall of text" that we need to avoid.
>> We need to get this right and to provide guidance that will support
>> consistency.  In most cases, I am all for brevity but since both Norah and
>> KrisAnne have asked for a style guide that includes voice and tone I think
>> we need to include those sections.
>> So, a brief intro, the sections for Voice, Tone, and Style and maybe the
>> Special Language - althought that is one I do notyet have content for.
>> I am OK with adding additional sections but these to me are a minimum and
>> I have content to begin them. I will proceed with those four and leave the
>> Special Language for further discussion since Brent supports it maybe he
>> can help.
>> On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org <mailto:
>> shawn@w3.org>> wrote:
>>     Thanks for getting this going, Sharron!
>>     I think that we want this Style Guide to be as short and
>> easy-to-consume as feasible. If so, we'll want to be thoughtful about what
>> we include and what not to clutter it with. For example, maybe we don't
>> need to include obvious things, and certainly we don't want to recreate
>> general writing best practices.
>>     An example of a questionable item is: write out abbreviations on
>> first reference. I'll start a separate thread on that point specifically...
>>     Another point is that we want this Style Guide to be for all of the
>> WAI website, and for Understanding WCAG at least. For some aspects, we
>> might have different styles for different types of
>> resources/documents/pages.
>>     Thanks,
>>     ~Shawn
>>     On 6/30/2017 10:14 AM, Sharron Rush wrote:
>>         I am thinking about how this will be presented and would like to
>> suggest this format.  Sarah and Shawn, if you agree I will format the wiki
>> to reflect these sections:
>>         *Introduction* – What the guide is meant to do, how it will make
>> our job easier, and how to use it.*
>>         Voice* – Can we make a statement about what we want the quality
>> of the voice to be? I am thinking about some of the adjectives we used to
>> describe how we wanted the web site to be.  Some words that will suggest
>> rhythm, and maybe a list of voice qualities to avoid. Each statement could
>> then be explained it in more detail and examples provided for how to put it
>> into practice*.
>>         Tone* – This seems a bit trickier and might entail how to use the
>> voice we agree on with different tones. There will be variation depending
>> on different scenarios, do you agree?  This may be a place to reference our
>> personas.
>>         *Style* – After introducing the guide and setting voice and tone,
>> that's when I think we get into the style guide items that Shawn and
>> Annabelle started and Sarah expanded on.
>>         *Specialist language* – Since this is a specialized filed, should
>> we include any guidance on how to reference disability, W3C process,
>> referencing materials or anything else that is super-specialized for our
>> environment?
>>         Throughout I strongly believe that we should use as many examples
>> as possible and be specific to our own stuff, as the first set of guides
>> has done. Is this an approach we can agree on? or have I overlooked or
>> misunderstood any of it? This is new to me so don't hesitate to let me know.
>>         Thanks,
>>         Sharron
>>         --         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 Friday, 30 June 2017 19:39:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 23 June 2020 20:41:51 UTC