<div dir="ltr"><div>Paula is probably having a siesta now so I won't disturb her. I imagine the flamenco dancing lessons, all-night maraca practice, and those breakfast margaritas take their toll.</div><div><br></div><div>I'm looking at the the key knowledge (KK) dotpoint 11 for the new study design's U1O1 and I'm getting rather muddled.</div><div><br></div><div>It reads:</div><div><div><i><br></i></div><div><i>- formats and conventions suitable for graphic solutions such as titles, text styles, shapes, lines and arrows, sources of data and legend, colours and contrasts</i></div></div><div><br></div><div>It's unclear to me whether the list after "such as" is meant to be formats, or conventions, or a messy mixture of both. </div><div><br></div><div>We all know we must not confuse formats and conventions, but this KK seems to be doing that. </div><div><br></div><div>Or is it implying that "formats" (noun) is the same as "formatting" (verb), which seems wrong to me. I've always understood "formats" to mean "ways of presenting data or information" - e.g. you may choose to present data as a graph, or a table. Each of these formats has its own conventions - e.g. the graph has labelled axes; the table has bold headings and right-justified numbers in columns. </div><div><br></div><div>So, in this KK, is a "title" a format or a convention? If you ask me, it's neither, unless you argue that it's a convention that documents have titles.</div><div><br></div><div>The same applies to "lines and arrows" - is the KK saying they are formats or conventions?</div><div><br></div><div>I get more muddled with the last two "and"s in "<i>sources of data and legend, colours and contrasts".</i></div><div><i><br></i></div><div>How do you guys read this? Does it mean...</div><div> </div><div><i>*sources of data and [sources of] legend, </i></div><div><i>*colours</i></div><div><i>*contrasts.</i></div><div><br></div><div>Which sounds weird.</div><div><br></div><div>Or does it mean </div><div><br></div><div><div><i>*sources of data</i></div><div><i>*legend, </i></div><div><i>*colours</i></div><div><i>*contrasts.</i></div></div><div><br></div><div>Which is also weird. But if so, should it not be "legends"?</div><div><br></div><div>And - once again - is "sources of data" a format or a convention? Neither, IMO.</div><div><br></div><div>And, finally, we have "contrasts". </div><div>Is this referring to the difference between foreground and background colours? If so, why is it plural?</div><div><br></div><div>The consultation draft of the new study design simply said "* <i>formats and conventions suitable for different solutions". </i>The bits that confuse me were added in later versions, too late for us to offer official feedback.</div><div><br></div><div>What do you clever folk think the KK is saying?</div><div><br></div>-- <br><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div><i><br></i></div><div><span style="font-size:12.6666669845581px"><i>My grandfather suffered a terrible year fighting German soldiers and civilians. <br>But that was 2007, and he's a different man now.</i></span></div><div><br></div><div>Mark Kelly</div><div><img src="https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0B4DRNqu3Y8sZV04xVUpCaVJTbHc&revid=0B4DRNqu3Y8sZaG9iYzlkRTE2YkVkS2x0Mk4vM1Fja3BYdFYwPQ"><br></div><div><img src="https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0B4DRNqu3Y8sZN1ZEdkJ3aHdLUjA&revid=0B4DRNqu3Y8sZcENFZ21BMmczdy9FRzcvSmgrQ2w3d2M4Nkl3PQ"><br></div><div><a href="http://vceit.com" target="_blank">http://vceit.com</a></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</div>