From owner-sc35wg4+sc35wg4-domo=www.open-std.org@open-std.org Tue Mar 6 23:06:04 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sc35wg4-domo Delivered-To: sc35wg4-domo@www.open-std.org Received: by www.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521) id 62A293569A4; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 23:06:04 +0100 (CET) Delivered-To: sc35wg4@open-std.org Received: from mail-vx0-f175.google.com (mail-vx0-f175.google.com [209.85.220.175]) by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A447235692D; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 23:06:03 +0100 (CET) Received: by vcbfl13 with SMTP id fl13so6778581vcb.34 for ; Tue, 06 Mar 2012 14:06:02 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of alabon@gmail.com designates 10.52.65.239 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.52.65.239; Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of alabon@gmail.com designates 10.52.65.239 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=alabon@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=alabon@gmail.com Received: from mr.google.com ([10.52.65.239]) by 10.52.65.239 with SMTP id a15mr44220515vdt.51.1331071562844 (num_hops = 1); Tue, 06 Mar 2012 14:06:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:x-mailer:date:to:from:subject:cc:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-type; bh=jcDq20iyF1X0oPO0Dr6JJGOxiQe9qZhGdq+WQFA0JeY=; b=hNx0mQNRTvl+nbYhDbvNPpG/MN+nBUB1aoRalA41ouY4CR25BFgpLPruWDxwLDbmXB tIH1YKWZtdqd62ine6YbQsF3lXII3tEgjoY+7CHSAuCFbGADWCnmSWEb+ofT5v2xEQgd /50fWL3fXcwEmltDFf7Jfb0vidEcXUAfryJF6VgxPw46m4JBOy+4BCNz0IKu9wsxLAQw LFqb/Kam0NeH0BExd+cOxZ58i5XuzVVw1ipaie1vuZKL0Jpd2cTkQ6tgfPykedBOhnh5 CZFeMa9njhj9LFO92/g96sfM3/8RDsGI/EfvVp0xGJWqJAWLQRFzY5KYvVUvBboN2F7Y PFaQ== Received: by 10.52.65.239 with SMTP id a15mr37833170vdt.51.1331071562805; Tue, 06 Mar 2012 14:06:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from Osiris.gmail.com (modemcable087.250-177-173.mc.videotron.ca. [173.177.250.87]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id e18sm20027182vdh.20.2012.03.06.14.06.01 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 06 Mar 2012 14:06:01 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20120306165100.0e1af4f8@gmail.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 17:05:59 -0500 To: sc35wg4@open-std.org,jaeil@nia.or.kr From: Alain LaBonté Subject: Re: (SC35WG4.10) Reviced WD 17549 (4-direction devices) Cc: sc35wg1@open-std.org In-Reply-To: <20120306155520.76861356945@www.open-std.org> References: <20120229034257.97BBD9DB114@www.open-std.org> <20120306155520.76861356945@www.open-std.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_358809179==.ALT" Sender: owner-sc35wg4@open-std.org Precedence: bulk --=====================_358809179==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Le 2012-03-06 à 10:55, Andy Heath a écrit: >I'm just reviewing the English in this as I was requested to do and >immediately I hit a slight snag. The title is not good English. I >don't know if the title can be changed without a resolution but I >propose a number of alternatives: > >1. Guidelines on navigation methods for selecting in menus with >4-direction devices > >2. Guidelines on navigation methods for selection in menus with >4-direction devices > >3. Guidelines on navigation methods for selection menus with >4-direction devices > >My preference is 3. but perhaps this changes the meaning slightly ? [Alain] We could also say (better understanding of what it is ?) : 4. Methods for navigation and selection within menus with 4-direction devices. I think the relationship between words would not totally be clear for me unless we simplify. Is it really useful to say "guidelines on [...] methods"? The word "methods" by itself is simple enough and is already stronger and more meaningful than guidelines on methods. Alain Alain --=====================_358809179==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Le 2012-03-06 à 10:55, Andy Heath a écrit:
I'm just reviewing the English in this as I was requested to do and immediately I hit a slight snag.  The title is not good English.  I don't know if the title can be changed without a resolution but I propose a number of alternatives:

1. Guidelines on navigation methods for selecting in menus with 4-direction devices

2. Guidelines on navigation methods for selection in  menus with 4-direction devices

3. Guidelines on navigation methods for selection menus with 4-direction devices

My preference is 3. but perhaps this changes the meaning slightly ?

[Alain]  We could also say (better understanding of what it is ?) :
4. Methods for navigation and selection within menus with 4-direction devices.
I think the relationship between words would not totally be clear for me unless we simplify.

Is it really useful to say "guidelines on [...] methods"? The word "methods" by itself is simple enough and is already stronger and more meaningful than guidelines on methods.

Alain

Alain
--=====================_358809179==.ALT--