Andy
believe me - that is not a word I have ever used so I understand your
problem with it - but I am somewhat sympathetic to the sentiments
(semantics) if there is another word ....
I don't think the definition has to change but there is a hint of
difference that might suggest something like:
"Characteristics of the resource that affect how the intellectual
content of the resource can be communicated
or transmitted."
The current proposed defn of 'adaptability' is:
"Characteristics of the resource that affect how it can be modified
for users or agents."
I don't think that the values would need to change ....
What do others think?
Liddy
On 14/12/2006, at 10:19 PM, Andy Powell wrote:
>
> Liddy,
> I for one would find it easier to think about this if you could
> provide
> a proposed definition of dcterms:communicability and some possible
> value
> strings? That would make it easier to understand what is being
> proposed
> here.
>
> Is the definition something like
>
> A statement about the ease with which the resource can be communicated
> or transmitted
>
> ?
>
> If so, then I have absolutely no idea what the value strings for this
> property might be!
>
> Personally, I'd reject this proposal on the grounds that
> 'communicability' should never have been added to the dictionary in
> the
> first place - but that's another matter :-)
>
> Andy
> --
> Head of Development, Eduserv Foundation
> http://www.eduserv.org.uk/foundation/
> http://efoundations.typepad.com/
> [log in to unmask]
> +44 (0)1225 474319
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: DCMI Accessibility Community
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Liddy Nevile
>> Sent: 14 December 2006 11:07
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: a cat for the pigeons?
>>
>> We have talked a lot about the extra term we need for
>> accessability and other adaptability issues. Someone recently
>> suggested that the qualities we are describing using the new
>> term are to do with communication and comprehension and so we
>> could think of a term label such as 'communicability' instead
>> of adaptability. They were thinking of the term being used in
>> a range of contexts, as indeed we were too, and pointed out
>> that the purpose of the adaptation is to increase
>> communication...and that that applies equally when you are
>> asking if the content works on a phone screen as it does when
>> you ask if it can be used by someone with a screen reader ...
>>
>> I would like to know what people think about that?
>>
>> Liddy
>>
|