CommLedgeThe need for standardised ICT terminologies in support of accessibility
Effective access to ICT will depend on the user being able to understand all of the features (such as the controls and capabilities) of the products and services that are and will be provided by ICT actors. In order to discover and understand these features, a user must first identify and recognize them. The names of these features are therefore a primary means by which a user can recognize and understand them.
If product and service features are poorly named, or if a familiar feature is named differently to the way that a user has previously encountered that feature, the user is likely to fail to recognize and understand it. If users fail to recognize and understand it, they are unlikely to be able to use it effectively. Learning to use ICT will always require a user to identify and then memorize the names of the various product features. This will always be a significant task for all users, but for older users and users with learning or intellectual disabilities this initial memorization task will be more challenging than for other users.
Having terms with clear and well understood meanings will aid this initial memorization task. However, if the terms for features are different from product to product, users will need to learn that multiple terms refer to the same underlying feature and will need to understand which name is used in which product (or in the worst case in different parts of the same product). This additional complexity will disproportionally disadvantage those older users and users with learning or intellectual disabilities who have impaired memory and comprehension abilities.
Terminology deals with terms and their use (a term is a name for an object). In most cases, the terms used for everyday objects have developed over the centuries and are taught to children as some of the words that make up their mother tongue. Problems arise when new objects (e.g. new ICT services or device functionalities) are given names that are not self-explanatory or immediately understood. The situation gets worse when different manufacturers or service providers use different terms for identical functionalities. This hampers the detection and uptake of those features and functionalities and hinders an easy migration of users between terminals and services of different providers.
Simple dictionary-based translation of the terms used for ICT functions from one language to another will not produce optimum results and will, in some cases, lead to the use of terms that are confusing or ridiculous (the user instructions of some products produced in East Asia are a legendary example of how such dictionary translations can produce incomprehensible and sometimes comical results).
If product and service features are poorly named, or if a familiar feature is named differently to the way that a user has previously encountered that feature, the user is likely to fail to recognize and understand it. If users fail to recognize and understand it, they are unlikely to be able to use it effectively. Learning to use ICT will always require a user to identify and then memorize the names of the various product features. This will always be a significant task for all users, but for older users and users with learning or intellectual disabilities this initial memorization task will be more challenging than for other users.
Having terms with clear and well understood meanings will aid this initial memorization task. However, if the terms for features are different from product to product, users will need to learn that multiple terms refer to the same underlying feature and will need to understand which name is used in which product (or in the worst case in different parts of the same product). This additional complexity will disproportionally disadvantage those older users and users with learning or intellectual disabilities who have impaired memory and comprehension abilities.
Terminology deals with terms and their use (a term is a name for an object). In most cases, the terms used for everyday objects have developed over the centuries and are taught to children as some of the words that make up their mother tongue. Problems arise when new objects (e.g. new ICT services or device functionalities) are given names that are not self-explanatory or immediately understood. The situation gets worse when different manufacturers or service providers use different terms for identical functionalities. This hampers the detection and uptake of those features and functionalities and hinders an easy migration of users between terminals and services of different providers.
Simple dictionary-based translation of the terms used for ICT functions from one language to another will not produce optimum results and will, in some cases, lead to the use of terms that are confusing or ridiculous (the user instructions of some products produced in East Asia are a legendary example of how such dictionary translations can produce incomprehensible and sometimes comical results).
The ETSI Specialist Task Forces on ICT Terminology (STF 604 and 652)
Harmonised ICT Terminology Recommendations
This Specialist Task Force (STF) 652 is an ETSI funded project that spans over a period ranging from November 2022 to May 2024. Its main aim is to develop a set of user-centred, accessible and harmonised terminology recommendations intended to improve the overall user experience and accessibility.
The work is covering commonly used, basic ICT features of current and upcoming ICT devices, services and applications, focusing on a mobile context. It proposes a user-centred, harmonised terminology of mobile ICT device (4 groups) and service and applications (12 groups) functions, focusing on communication in mobile contexts of use.
This STF can be seen as a follow-up of two previous STFs:
The work is covering commonly used, basic ICT features of current and upcoming ICT devices, services and applications, focusing on a mobile context. It proposes a user-centred, harmonised terminology of mobile ICT device (4 groups) and service and applications (12 groups) functions, focusing on communication in mobile contexts of use.
This STF can be seen as a follow-up of two previous STFs:
- STF 540 which has established and published the first version of the ETSI Guide 203 499 (version 1.1.1) in August 2019 applied to five languages: English, French, German, Italian and Spanish;
- STF 604 which has established and published the second version of the ETSI Guide 203 499 (version 2.1.2) in July 2022 applied to fourteen additional languages: Bulgarian, Croatian, Czech, Danish, Finnish, Greek, Hungarian, Norwegian, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Slovak and Swedish.
Main result
The final result is the ETSI Guide
EG 203 499
that will serve as a basis for further improvements of accessibility in ETSI.
EG 203 499