Re: Another attempt at plain language

[Michael Everson <[e-mail]>]

On 11 Sep 2015, at 22:43, David Starner <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> My issue with a tag like this is that for pretty much any other tag, given a decent-sized chunk of text prototypical for that tag, it could be so tagged. It seems fairly easy to disagree about whether even the most prototypical -plain text is actually -plain or if it's just normal.

I tend to agree. As I said before, "Basic English” is well-defined and a subtag for it would make sense. But this:

> On 12 Sep 2015, at 07:30, Tobias Bengfort <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> On 11/09/15 20:44, Shawn Steele wrote:
>> It's also unclear to me that a web developer would create multiple 
>> English versions of a web page to enable this support.
> 
> This is exactly what is required by WCAG:
> 
>    When text requires reading ability more advanced than [...],
>    supplemental content, or a version that does not require
>    reading ability more advanced than [...], is available.
> 
>    - http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#meaning-supplements
> 
> This issue is that it is currently not clear how such a simpler version
> would be referenced.

… is not, I think, best solved by a subtag.

Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/