Oracle comment on 3.1.7 Plain Language

[cwadamsoforacle]

We have concern about the "most common 1500 words or phrases" source. There are many different lists of what are common words, therefor we could run into a situation where we use one list and a customer uses a different list. Would you need to cite the list in the conformance statement?

Common words for a purchasing system are different from for a Customer Relations Management system and a Human Resource system. How are we supposed to find the 1500 common words?

All of the exceptions seem impossible to demonstrate. The criteria of "clearer" , "easier to understand" , "friendlier", and "appropriate" are not testable.

Double Negatives are required as part of the grammar in some languages.

The evaluator now has to be a linguistics expert in order to know if the exceptions are valid. This adds to the responsibility placed upon developers and evaluators.

Do instructions include a reference manual? This needs to be clarified.

Companies may have their own documented Acronyms and Abbreviations that are not "very common". How can these be included in this SC?

[eadraffan]

I think I mentioned some of the issues you raise when these issues were originally discussed in one of our calls. The word lists used will differ for each language and purpose as will grammatical constructions.

So maybe this has to be for English and based on Inclusion.eu easy-to-read guidelines where appropriate http://easy-to-read.eu/ or something similar.

[lseeman]

referencing the main issue so we remember to look at this #30

[awkawk]

Thanks for the comment - the Working Group has not reached consensus on this proposed SC so it is deferred for future consideration.