RE: fancy talk about "plain language" [was: RE: Proposed 4.1 wo rding ...]

Actually I like "easily understood" as much as I do plain language. The first
is simple to translate, which is a helpful guide.

I was not aware that we had consensus on the decision to assume that 4.1
covers presentation methods, structure of content etc. I think that is a bad
idea for the reasons I outlined earlier -
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2002JulSep/0216 - mostly that
the implementation and testing strategies are very different.

cheers

Chaals

>At 08:13 AM 2002-08-29, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
>
>>Hmmmmm
>>
>>I think using a term  like  "plain language"  to mean more than
>>language (that is, including structure,  formatting,  illustration and
>>all other things that can be used to make writing easier to
>>understand).
>>
>>"plain language"   may be a term of art in some field,  but I would
>>think we might chose a term that translates more directly from the
>>words used to the meaning we intend.
>