Re: 4.1 success criteria - proposal for division

Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.org.w3c.accessibility.guidelines
Message-ID <00f701c249ee$292945d0$4e4225d5@emmanuelle1>
I agree totally with Charles and Johh,

Maybe the following article can help to edit some more appropriate
approaches:
http://www.plainlanguagenetwork.org/Rapport/rap19.html#FIVE

regards,

Emmanuelle

----- Original Message -----
From: "john_slatin" <[email protected]>
To: "'Charles McCathieNevile'" <[email protected]>; "WAI GL"
<[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2002 4:25 PM
Subject: RE: 4.1 success criteria - proposal for division


|
| Charles makes an excellent point.  Perhaps the advice section for 4.1
could
| include something to the effect that authors should follow the conventions
| appropriate to the natural language of the content.  A further point: even
| in English, it's not always appropriate to avoid the passive.  There are
| times when it isn't possible to assign grammatical agency-- especially in
| bureaucratic writing.  The Section 508 standards would fail this criterion
| if we were to insist on it, for example.
|
| There are implicit cultural assumptions here, too.  In the United States,
| for example, many people place high value on coming directly to "the
point,"
| both in writing and in oral communication.  But in many countries such
| directness is considered rude, and in some cases it may be politically
| dangerous (which is why satire flourishes under repressive regimes).
|
| John
|
| John Slatin, Ph.D.
| Director, Institute for Technology & Learning
| University of Texas at Austin
| FAC 248C, Mail code G9600
| Austin, TX 78712
| ph 512-495-4288, f 512-495-4524
| email [email protected]
| web http://www.ital.utexas.edu
|
|
|
| -----Original Message-----
| From: Charles McCathieNevile [mailto:[email protected]]
| Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2002 9:05 am
| To: WAI GL
| Subject: 4.1 success criteria - proposal for division
|
|
|
| Hi,
|
| I think it is important that any success criteria for language use
includes
| a list of applicable languages.
|
| For example, there is a proposal not to use noun sequences. In french, one
| can reasonably say
|
|   la version du loi de droits de general de gaulle
|
| (either: General de Gaulle's version of the law of rights, or the version
of
| the law of General de Gaulle's rights).
|
| Similarly, it is proposed that verbs in the passive mood be avoided. (I.e.
| the last sentence would fail, twice). I don't know if this applies in all
| languages.
|
| If we do not think that a criterion works for a particular language, we
| should not say anything. If we think that a criterion does not work for a
| particular language, we should say so. I realise that this will leave us
| with a weaker list than we might have, but hopefully it will encourage
| people with relevant expertise to help fill the list. It will also
hopefully
| mean we avoid saying things that are wrong and would cause problems.
|
| cheers
|
| chaals
|
| --
| Charles McCathieNevile  http://www.w3.org/People/Charles  tel: +61 409 134
| 136 SWAD-E http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe ------------ WAI
| http://www.w3.org/WAI  21 Mitchell street, FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia
| fax(fr): +33 4 92 38 78 22  W3C, 2004 Route des Lucioles, 06902 Sophia
| Antipolis Cedex, France
|
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.