( LANGUAGE GUIDELINES FOR FAQ WRITERS AND SITE TRANSLATION TEAM )
( LANGUAGE GUIDELINES FOR FAQ WRITERS AND SITE TRANSLATION TEAM )
Carys
USERS: THREAT OR MENACE?
Apr. 5th, 2009 08:44 pmETA: Judges' Ruling: "users" will be replaced with "accounts" throughout translation strings where "user" or "users" cannot reasonably and logically be replaced with "you".
What are we going to do in these situations? "Individual" is too cold-corporate; "People" is misleading (because sometimes the "USER" referenced in the translation string might also be a community or communities); "Persons" has the same problem as "People" (and is grammatically-hideous into the bargain).
I'm just about ready to replace "user" with "dude or dudes"....
Your thoughts?
Accessibility issue
Apr. 2nd, 2009 11:46 amThe problem is that some of the documentation is written with visual, spatial, or movement-specific language. To the extent possible, FAQs/sitedoc should not be written with the assumption that the eventual reader is going to be seeing the same images and screen ratios, nor that they'll be interacting with their computer with the same input devices as the writer's. On the one hand, you have people with disabilities using the site; on the other hand, you have people with an array of mobile devices using the site; and on the third hand, you have a few people out there still cruising in lynx, because they're Richard Stallman. (Not to mention that we'll support different siteschemes, and people will do all manner of funky things with their journal styles.)
I'm going to do a first sweep through the FAQ docs as currently written, but I strongly suggest you guys hook up with the Accessibility team for more expert advice. (For instance, I am unsure about whether or not dropdown menu is a term that is meaningful on a screenreader.) My inexpert advice is that, wherever possible, instead of describing a visual element, you include the image and its alt-text as it will appear on the site (maybe with a note that it's the site default?), and if you can skip the visual element and just link to the thingy in question, that's even better.
By visuospatiai issue, I mean that the FAQ says "perform this motion" for interacting with the site, or "item found to the left of second item" or "choose the [textual description of image] to accomplish task" Any language which requires the user to be seeing the same site visually or using the mouse or keyboard like the writer.
Additionally, all link text should be meaningful ("Choose your sitescheme" instead of "click here to"), and, a title attribute should be set when the link text doesn't match the page title of the page the link refers to.
FYI Each tab of my account settings has a URL, so you can link directly to that tab.
( FAQ's w/ visuospatial language )
P.S. Psst.
FYI: functionality change
Mar. 28th, 2009 05:10 am(Long story. Short version is: doing it to fall more in line with 'PG-13' and the COPPA regulations.)
Interactions Menu
Mar. 11th, 2009 09:34 pmThanks to
denise, I was able to get a broader sample for the naming of the menu in the profile.
The poll itself was next to useless, but the comments were very illuminating. Several trends emerged:
- having "profile" in the name is misleading, as the only thing the menu has to do with the profile is the fact that it's located there
- "action" describes the menu better than "navigation", but it's still not quite right
Several people proposed "user interactions menu" or "networking menu". I'm reluctant to use "netwoking menu", as "Network" has a specific meaning in DW (it's the friendsfriends function). I'm also reluctant to use "user" in the menu name, as a similar menu appears on comms and feeds.
After reviewing all these arguments, I'm making an executive decision because someone has to. The menu shall henceforth be known as the Interactions Menu. If you've got an objection, now is the time to argue it :)
(Also, can someone tell me whether "interactions" should be in the plural or singular? I like it in the plural, but I'm not a native speaker.)
Thanks to all who participated and commented!
Site schemes and docs
Feb. 27th, 2009 02:50 pmHowever, all the schemes are going to be using the same menu structure. I think that the long term plan is to split off the menu structure from the schemes, so the schemes just have to point to the menu structure and updating that will update all the schemes. Don't quote me on that though. From our perspective this means that we can say "select 'syndicated feeds' under the 'read' option of the site menu".
Also, if referencing pages like this, always be sure to give a direct link to the page as well. The idea being along the lines of "here's a link to the page for you now, and here's how you can find it next time you need it".