WCAG 2.0 Comment Submission

Name: Shawn Henry
Email: shawn@w3.org
Affiliation: W3C WAI
Document: W2
Item Number: glossary
Part of Item: 
Comment Type: editorial
Comment (Including rationale for any proposed change):
Editorial suggestions

Proposed Change:
note: some similar suggestions for other appendices and so any changes should be synched



suggestion: unbold \"Note:\" and \"Example:\" (rationale: with them bold my eye is drawn from the bold term to the bold Note or Example, bypassing the actual definition. also makes it harder to skim the terms ) 



suggestion: remove the numbers from the notes and examples -- e.g., instead of \"Note 1:\", \"Note 2:\", \"Note 3:\" just have \"Note:\", \"Note:\", Note:\".. (rationale: simplifies, makes more friendly and less engineering-like and formal) 



suggestion: consider putting the referenced terms in regular font style, not italic (rationale: simplify visual design).  consider using standard link colours for terms 



suggestion: consider removing [brackets] from references. (rationale: simplifies visual design. also some people will not know what the brackets mean and will waste cognitive processing trying to figure it out.) 



suggestion: Consider deleting one of the “normative”s -- from the <h1>: \"Appendix A: Glossary (Normative)\" or from the first sentence: “This section is normative.” If leave first sentence, change to “Appendix A: Glossary is normative.” 



suggestion: clean up top matter (\"Quick Table of Contents\" extraneous? \"Appendix A: Glossary (Normative)\" repetitive with <h1> and links to self) 



question: should the <title> and the <h1> match, or be more similar?

Received on Thursday, 22 June 2006 21:04:16 UTC