text:
Women's Writing Before Woolf: A Social Reference

A collaborative project created by students enrolled in ENGL3013, "Women's Writing," at the University of Newcastle, Australia.

Thomas Bentley
/Thomas Bentley (2)/

/Alexander Dyce/
Alexander Dyce (2)

Barbara K. Lewalski
Barbara Kiefer Lewalski – Theorist/Academic/Researcher

Biography

On February 22, 1931 in Topeka, Kansas, Barbara Kiefer (later Lewalski) was born to John, a farmer, and Vivo Kiefer, a school teacher and speech therapist. Lewalski went on to study at the Emporia State University, Kansas, where she attained a Bachelor of Science, then succeeding in her Ph.D. in 1956 from the prestigious University of Chicago. Lewalski’s Ph.D. supervisor was Ernest Sirluck, who had been an important literary commentator on Milton’s work. After completing her doctorate, Lewalski went on to teach and work at Brown University, in three different roles, in the years between 1956 to 1982. After this period, she would become Professor of English Literature, as well as History and Literature, at Harvard University. Lewalski retired from this position, having taught there from 1983 to 2010.

In 1966, Lewalski became a Guggenheim fellow, a great honour for academics of the arts in the United States. In the year 1980 she was elected a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and in 1986 became a member of the American Philosophical Society (Dubrow 181).

Barbara married Ken Lewalski, a fellow professor at Brown University, and the pair had one son, David Lewalski. Kenneth passed away during 2006, and Barbara passed away in 2018, due to a heart attack, brought on by congenital heart disease. Barbara is remembered for her contributions to Renaissance literature, and to her barrier-breaking work on Milton.

Works

Stretching for more than sixty years, Lewalski’s works and contributions to the field of literature, history, and renaissance understandings are vast. Lewalski’s main focus rested on Milton’s work, following her Ph.D. supervisor, Ernest Sirluck. Her first article published in 1953 was titled ‘The Authorship of Ancient Bounds’, which discusses an unsigned tract, thought to be written by Joshua Sprigge in 1645, speaking of religious toleration (Kiefer). In this work it is evident a holistic and liberal approach, which is so distinctive of Lewalski’s later publications.

Lewalski contributed much to the literary history of Milton’s era, and beside her own authored books, is credited as editor in numerous other works. We also find a strong presence as a research expert, and of course as educator, both at Brown and Harvard.

The first full book published by Lewalski in 1966 was ‘

Typology and Poetry: A Consideration of Herbert, Vaughan, and Marvell’, Protestant Poetics and the Seventeenth-Century Religious Lyric’, ‘"Paradise Lost" and the Rhetoric of Literary Forms’, ‘Writing Women in Jacobean England’, ‘Form and Reform in Renaissance England’, and ‘The Life of John Milton: A Critical Biography’.

In her work ‘Writing Women in Jacobean England’, Lewalski discusses the active roles of nine featured women writers, and contends that they were not passive, but rather formed their own identity and power. This is an important point to make on early women literature, as it diverges from the commonly accepted notion of women in the Renaissance as sidelined.

While scholars generally see her work as important in gaining useful insights into the roles of women in early modern literature, some scholars argue that some of her work lacked critical and evidential analysis.

Lewalski’s re-evaluation of women writers in Jacobean England, served to change the detrimental archaic paradigm of women as less valuable or influential, than men writers (Loewenstein 175).

Legacy

Throughout her long academic career, Lewalski displayed her concern with engrained ideas which had been present in early modern literature. These concerns manifested themselves as ideas surrounding religious ethics, and ideas of patriarchy, and authors who challenged these views.

Lewalski leaves a legacy of spearheading a field which had been ignored by many previous academics, and paved the way for important discussions of gender roles, and on the significance of women writers of the past. Lewalski stands as a major figure in the field of English literary studies, which is evident not only in the numerous works which have been authored and edited by her, but by the awards which have been given to her for her contributions.

Her analyses and study of devotional lyric is an area which Lewalski revolutionised, by taking this often-overlooked genre and creating a new paradigm for understanding (Martz). What Lewalski gave to the field of English literary studies, is a wealth of critical thinking, which would go on to inspire the next generations of academics. Richard Strier notes that before Lewalski’s work, there was but a single text which dominated the reading of this genre – Lous L. Martz’ ‘Poetry of Meditation’. Strier notes that this is important because a singular authority can create a narrow view of history, and leaves little room for those without evidence of another analyses (Strier 185).

Juliet Fleming, however, views Lewalski’s work with more critical eyes, and discusses that her conservative views on feminism may not be as relevant or revolutionary at the turn of the millennium, as they were during the time when the majority of her work was written and published. Fleming also states that while the work makes for a good introduction, it is perhaps too near-sighted, she states ‘Lewalski’s own approach may help to popularize writing by early modern women but comprises only the beginning of an adequate account of it.’ (Fleming 201).

References

Clare, Janet. Barbara Kiefer Lewalski, "Writing Women in Jacobean England" (Book Review). vol. 46, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1995.

Dubrow, Heather. "Genre in Barbara Lewalski's Career/The Genre of Barbara Lewalski's Career." Milton Quarterly, vol. 53, no. 4, 2019, pp. 180-183.

Ferguson, Margaret W. Moderation and its Discontents: Recent Work on Renaissance Women. vol. 20, Feminist Studies, Inc, College Park, Md, 1994.

Fleming, Juliet. "Writing Women in Jacobean England Barbara K. Lewalski." The Huntington Library Quarterly, vol. 57, no. 2, 1994, pp. 199-204.

Kiefer, Barbara. "The Authorship of Ancient Bounds." Church History, vol. 22, no. 3, 1953, pp. 192-196.

Lewalski, Barbara K. Donne's Anniversaries and the Poetry of Praise: The Creation of a Symbolic Mode. vol. 1508., Princeton University Press, Princeton; Jackson, 2016.

Lewalski, Barbara K. Milton’s Brief Epic: The Genre, Meaning and Art of Paradise Regained. Providence, Brown University Press, 1966. Internet Archive

Lewalski, Barbara K. Paradise Lost and the Rhetoric of Literary Forms. Princeton University Press, Princeton;Ewing;, 2016.

Lewalski, Barbara K. "Writing Women and Reading the Renaissance." Renaissance Quarterly, vol. 44, no. 4, 1991, pp. 792-821.

Loewenstein, David. "Five Perspectives on Barbara Lewalski's Path‐breaking Scholarship and Career: Preface." Milton Quarterly, vol. 53, no. 4, 2019, pp. 175-175.

Madsen, William G. "Milton's Brief Epic: The Genre, Meaning, and Art of "Paradise Regained" . Barbara Kiefer Lewalski, Milton." Modern Philology, vol. 65, no. 3, 1968, pp. 251-253.

Martz, Louis L. The Poetry of Meditation: A Study in English Religious Literature of the Seventeenth Century. Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn, 1974.

Strier, Richard. "Barbara Lewalski and a Critical Revolution." Milton Quarterly, vol. 53, no. 4, 2019, pp. 184-186.

Cristina Malcolmson
Josephine A. Roberts

Mihoko Suzuki
Mihoko Suzuki (2)

Women’s Early Modern Letters Online
Early Modern Women's Complain Poetry Index

RECIRC: The Reception and Circulation of Women's Writing, 1550–1700
RECIRC:

The Reception and Circulation of Early Modern Women’s Writing (RECIRC) is a research project that focuses on the impact and influence female writers and their productions had between 1550-1700. The project is led by Marie-Louise Coolahan and is based at the National University of Ireland Galway. Research was conducted on writers who were read, born in or resided in Anglophone countries, which meant that the works were not all written in English. RECIRC’s aim is to produce a quantitative data base of these works from the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The research questions that guided RECIRC’s analysis of these works were:

1.	How did texts by women circulate?

2.	Which female authors were read and by whom?

3.	How were they read?

4.	How did women build reputations as writers?

5.	How did gender shape ideas about authorship?

Who?

RECIRC is a project that involves a team of 11 researchers based at the National University of Ireland, Galway.

RECIRC is led by Marie-Louise Coolahan, the Principal Investigator with a background as a Professor of English at the National University of Ireland, Galway. Her own professional experiences include being the author of Women, Writing, and Language in Early Modern Ireland (Oxford UP, 2010) as well as a strong repertoire of articles and essays on early textual transmissions.

Bronagh McShane is part of the 11-person research team and is a social historian that specialises in the history of women, religion and confessionalisation in early modern Ireland and Europe. She has been published broadly and is currently conducting her own study of early modern Irish nuns.

Emilie K.M. Murphy is another member of the team and is a cultural historian whose research within RECIRC is in the transmission and translation of female-authored texts across sixteenth and seventeenth century convents and seminaries.

Felicity Maxwell’s role within the research team is focused on women’s and servants’ letters, combined with English literature, social and cultural history, and the study of manuscripts. Felicity is widely published and is currently writing a monograph extending her research for RECIRC titled, Serving the Protestant Public: Gender, Vocation and Collaboration.

The fifth member of the research team is Evan Bourke, a literary historian with a specialisation in women’s writing, epistolary culture, network analysis and data visualization. His PhD thesis analysed the formation and subsequent reputation of three women connected to Samuel Hartlib’s correspondence.

Sajed Chowdhury, prior to joining RECIRC was Modern Humanities Research Association Fellow for the Catalogue of English Literary Manuscripts 1450-1700. His experiences led his research within RECIRC to focus on early women’s writings, manuscript cultures and the history of science.

Erin A. McCarthy is another broadly published member of the research team whose particular interest in poetry and poetics, textual theory, and the history of material texts and reading, allow her to add to RECIRCs database with a keen engagement of the transmission and reception of women’s writing in manuscript miscellanies.

Mark Empey, another member of the research team and a cultural historian, has published articles and essays on the history of books, scholarly networks, and journaled religious conflicts, and has a particular interest in book history.

The eighth member of the research team is Wes Hamrick. He specialises in British and Irish literature of the eighteenth century, and its poetry, manuscripts and printing, His research project is on the influence of British print culture on Irish, Scots Gaelic, Scot’s vernacular, and Welsh.

Ioanna Kyvernitou is a PhD student, and her research within RECIRC investigates the way women’s studies, the history of philosophy and ontological engineering combine with and are related to philosophical issues.

David Kelly is responsible for the design and development of RECIRCs quantitative and analytical database.

Works:

There are four outlined work packages within RECIRC.

1.	Transnational Religious Networks is researched by Dr Bronagh McShane and Dr Emilie K.M. Murphy and focuses on the translation and transmission of female authored texts across Europe within the Catholic religious order. This research consulted religious orders such as: Augustinians, Benedictines, Brussels, and Dunkirk, Poor Clares, as well as the Bodleian Library, British Library, and the Archives of the Archdiocese of Westminster.

2.	The International Republic of Letters is researched by Dr Felicity Maxwell and Dr Evan Bourke and it focuses on the international circulation of letters across Europe as the key mode of communication of ideas and texts by women, thus creating intellectual networks. This work package is based on the Hartlib Papers.

3.	The Manuscript Miscellany as Instrument of Circulation and Site of Reception is researched by Dr Sajed Chowdhury and Dr Erin A. McCarthy. It focuses on the reception towards women’s writing, specifically within manuscript miscellany, investigating varying methods of reception through compilation, adaptation, and excerptions. The research for this work package was conducted through an audit of the manuscript collections held at the Bodleian Library, The British Library, the Folger Shakespeare Library, and the Huntington Library, through this audit 750 miscellanies were found, 128 of which contained women’s writing.

4.	Transmission Trails and Book Ownership is researched by Dr Mark Empey. This work package creates a map of the transmission of women’s texts through evidence in early modern libraries, patterns of book ownership and the attribution of an author. This was researched through catalogues of auctions, book lists, inventories, wills, and private libraries, using Early English Books Online and Private Libraries of Renaissance England.

The IRC work package focuses on The Reception and Circulation of Irish Women’s Writing, 1550-1800. It is researched by Dr Wes Hamrick and details the transmission and translation of Irish women’s writing up to 1800, a hundred years past RECIRCs initial focus of 1550-1700. This work package contributes to critical study about multi-lingual anthologies and comparative studies.

Reputation/ Legacy:

The RECIRC research project’s professional reputation is solidified by its supporters, The European Research Council, The National University of Ireland Galway, The Irish Research Council, and the Moore Institute. Their attention to detail and historical accuracy is demonstrated through RECIRCs efforts to ensure that at least two researchers have checked every piece of evidence, yet they still encourage others to consult additional primary evidence to consolidate their knowledge.

RECIRC is also strengthening the legacy of many women writers through their data demonstrating the most commonly seen and circulated authors like, Queen Elizabeth I, Katherine Jones, Viscountess Ranelagh, Mary Percy, Abbess of Brussels Benedictine convent and more.

The RECIRC database contains: •	1,878 female authors from England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, North America, the Low Countries, Denmark, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Portugal, from classical to early modern times. •	7,319 works authored by women. •	4,845 receptions of female authors and their works by 678 identified people in 1,431 different sources. •	15% of received authors were received twice or more. •	13% of receptions in the dataset are anonymous, meaning the identity of the author, audience or owner cannot be identified.

The RECIRC research team admits that there is far more material that is continuously being uncovered and recorded that they could not locate and analyse within their five-year time frame for their research project, so they leave an open-ended legacy that can be added to by further research in the future.

References

@RECIRC_. "EM Women's Writing". Twitter, 2014. Bourke, Evan. "Female Involvement, Membership, And Centrality: A Social Network Analysis of The Hartlib Circle". Special Issue: Collaboration, Translation, Publication: Literary and Linguistic Exchanges Between Early Modern England And Europe, vol 14, no. 4, 2017. Wiley Online Library, doi:10.1111/lic3.12388. Coolahan, Marie-Louise. "The Cultural Dynamics of Reception". Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies, vol 50, no. 1, 2020. Duke University Press. McShane, Bronagh Ann. "An Introduction To RECIRC: The Reception and Circulation of Early Modern Women’s Writing, 1550-1700". Paisajes Espirituales, 2017. RECIRC. "RECIRC | The Reception & Circulation of Early Modern Women's Writing, 1550 - 1700 | NUI Galway | ERC". Recirc.Nuigalway.Ie, 2020.


text:
Wikijunior talk:Small Numbers/6

Dice sentence
"A dice has six sides"

Might be good sentence to swap in.

-- Harry Wood (discuss • contribs) 02:47, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Wikijunior talk:Small Numbers/6


text:
ICT4 Elderly/Accessibility

Contents of the module
 * The complexity of User Interfaces;
 * Conventional User Interfaces design “one-size-fits-all” (which ignores all the accessibility requirements of older adults);
 * The need for user interface adapted to different kinds of elderly impairment (visibility, sound and touch);
 * Smart applications adapted to different kinds of elderly impairment;
 * Accessibility across the entire system lifecycle; Inclusive design of smart cities, smart buildings and smart environments;
 * Interaction-driven accessibility (touch screens, dynamic visualization).

Learning objectives
 * Participants will understand what web accessibility means (that websites, tools, and technologies are designed and developed so that people with disabilities or elderly people can use them);
 * Participants will understand that making the web accessible benefits individuals, businesses, and society.

Learning outcomes
 * Participants are able to choose the most suitable Interface in regards with their age-related impairments;
 * Participants are able to choose the most suitable applications for their age-related impairments;
 * Participants are able to adjust (Interface, App) settings in regards with their age-related impairments.

Learning scenario
 * Videos;
 * Interactive demonstrations;
 * Touch screens.

Evaluation

Practical task: participants must find and successfully use smart applications in regards with their age-related impairments.

Following this module learners will:
 * Participants are able to choose the most suitable Interface in regards with their age-related impairments;
 * Participants are able to choose the most suitable applications for their age-related impairments;
 * Participants are able to adjust (Interface, App) settings in regards with their age-related impairments.

Introduction of the training
What does User Interface (UI) mean?

User interface (UI) is a broad term for any system, either physical or software based, that allows a user to connect with a given technology. Many different kinds of user interfaces come with various devices and software programs. Many of them have some basic similarities, although each one is unique in key ways.

One main type of user interface is called a graphical user interface (GUI). This includes the interfaces for the modern operating systems many of us are familiar with, particularly Windows, as well as other kinds of software programs that are made to be driven mainly by icons or images rather than text commands. Users can contrast the graphical user interface to a text interface such as the MS-DOS system that was used to operate personal computers of earlier decades.

Other kinds of user interfaces include touch screen interfaces, a common type of UI for mobile devices, and other physical types of interfaces for hardware pieces. For example, a remote control for a DVD player, audio system, television or game console can be thought of as a user interface for that device. Other kinds of software-oriented user interfaces are becoming more and more sophisticated, often using a combination of graphical and text elements to drive specific user activities.

Recent advances in sensing, networking and ambient intelligence technologies have resulted in a rapid emergence of smart environments. Among these, the so-called Smart Home (SH) has gained a lot of attention for the provision of enhanced quality of life within the home. The smart home concept was formalized by Lutolf, who primarily focused on the integration of different services within a home environment by using a common communication system. More recently, Satpathy proposed a smart home concept more centered on helping the residents live independently and comfortably with the help of mechanical and digital devices. This definition is closer to our current understanding of SHs.

One of the motivations for smart home research is the significant worldwide increase of an aging population. In fact, according to the World Health Organization (WHO), the world’s elderly population (defined as people aged 60 and older) has increased drastically in the past decades and will reach about 2 billion in 2050 [3]. In Europe, the proportion of the EU27 elderly population above 65 years of age is foreseen to rise to 30% in 2060 [4].

The elderly have specific health issues that have to be considered. A significant proportion of elderly population suffer or may suffer with higher probability from age-related conditions such as Parkinson’s disease, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, Alzheimer’s disease, different chronic diseases and limitations in physical functions. For them, SH technologies may help to enhance quality of life, prolong independent living and reduce caregivers’ necessary time and healthcare costs in general, without losing the safety that a continuous and unobtrusive monitoring provides. Thus the benefits of these technologies are not only for the older adults, but also their families, caregivers and society in general. This is what is sometimes known as Ambient Assisted Living (AAL).

Research objectives in this area range from low-level data acquisition by sensors up to high-level data integration and inference of knowledge through both data-driven and knowledge-driven approaches. Many recent works are related to activity recognition as a means of extracting higher-level information. There are different types of activities, but the common ground to all of them is that they should be recognizable as such by a non-technician (e.g., “preparing a meal”, “taking a bath” or “watch television while sitting on the sofa”). If human activities are correctly and automatically identified, a wide range of applications and services become possible, such as detection of health emergencies, early disease detection, professional advice on routine lifestyle, health status monitoring and help in treatment prescription. Some concrete examples of applications can be found in (a mobile emergency response system), (a fall detection system) and (which deals with monitoring activities of daily life and recommending services for active lifestyle).

Keywords

User Interfaces, Elderly impairment (visibility, sound and touch), Smart cities, Smart buildings, Smart environments.

Learning subject/ field

The trainer will start the session by a preliminary discussion with participants about their previous experiences with User interface (UI) and other forms of it. This is intended to be a warm-up activity to get familiar with terms as UI.

After this initial debate, the trainer will present the main ideas and concepts involving User interface (UI) and demonstrate its main functions. The different types of User interface (UI) and their usefulness for elderly people will be showed. This part of the session will be supported by a slide presentation prepared in advance.

Next, participants will learn about User interface (UI)- interfaces adapted to different kinds of elderly impairment (visibility, sound and touch). They will learn how User interface works and how they are becoming more and more efficient in supporting daily tasks and routine of elderly people. This will be followed by a practical activity. Participants will have the chance to experiment with different user interfaces (pc, tablet, smart phone).

This will be followed by an in-classroom activity, where participants will firstly discuss UI with each other and secondly, they would have to use personal adapted User interfaces (UI).

After this exercise, the trainer will wrap-up the session with a debriefing moment and a small evaluation of the session.

Session structure
The purpose of the session will be:

 * to provide an introduction to the most suitable Interface in regards with their age-related impairments
 * to facilitate settings in regards with their age-related impairments
 * to discover the most suitable applications for their age-related impairments
 * to motivate using and discover most suitable interface

Introduction
The trainer will start the session by a preliminary discussion with participants about their previous experiences with User interface (UI) and other forms of it. This is intended to be a warm-up activity to get familiar with terms as UI.

Step 1
After this initial debate, the trainer will present the main ideas and concepts involving User interface (UI) and demonstrate its main functions. The different types of User interface (UI) and their usefulness for elderly people will be showed. This part of the session will be supported by a slide presentation prepared in advance.

Step 2
Next, participants will learn about User interface (UI)- interfaces adapted to different kinds of elderly impairment (visibility, sound and touch). They will learn how User interface works and how they are becoming more and more efficient in supporting daily tasks and routine of elderly people. This will be followed by a practical activity. Participants will have the chance to experiment with different user interfaces (pc, tablet, smart phone).

Step 3
This will be followed by an in-classroom activity, where participants will firstly discuss UI with each other and secondly, they would have to use personal adapted User interfaces (UI).

Homework
Participant should watch the videos below and try to imagine and write down the most suitable forms of UI for them. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSB6N08DOZU&t=59s What is USER INTERFACE? What does USER INTERFACE mean? USER INTERFACE meaning & explanation]

Defriefing
After this exercise, the trainer will wrap-up the session with a debriefing moment and a small evaluation of the session.

Evaluation
Participants will answer a small questionnaire to evaluate the form and the content of the session.

Overall duration of the session
1 hour and 30 min

title: ICT4 Elderly/Accessibility


text:
ICT4 Elderly/Alternatives for privacy

Contents of the module Learning objectives
 * End-to-end encryption applications;
 * Advantages and disadvantages of these applications;
 * Search engines;
 * Browser settings;
 * Messenger;
 * Secure passwords, organize accounts / pw.

To introduce to participants the viable alternatives to the mainstream ways of communication.

Learning outcomes
 * To be able to identify participant’s own level of comfort when it comes to private information sharing;
 * To be able to select a proper tool/app as an alternative to the mainstream way of communication;
 * To be able to identify the users with similar interests in protecting privacy and offer them alternatives for communication with the participant;
 * To be able to use alternative tools/apps for everyday communication.

Learning scenario
 * Participant are led to discussion regarding the term digital footprint;
 * Participant are encouraged to discuss their views on disclosure/sharing of their personal data;
 * Participant are encouraged to share their knowledge on specific safety setting they are familiarized with or how to use them;
 * Participants are introduced to personal data sharing concept (disclosure of personal data, benefits of personal data disclosure);
 * Tech talk - safety aspects of web browsers (settings, alternative browsers), cookies, cache, search engines (mainstream and alternative), messengers (mainstream and alternative), ISP (public, private),VPN, security (safe passwords, key cards, Remember a Sentence).

Evaluation
 * Assignments;
 * Feedback exercises;
 * Role play.

Following this module learners will:

Introduction of the training
Keywords

Learning subject/ field

The purpose of the session will be:

 * to provide an introduction to viable alternatives to the mainstream ways of communication are, to provide awareness to participants of what data they disclose through their conduct on the Internet, awareness of important and useful settings, an overview of security and privacy, presentation of alternatives
 * to facilitate the identification of the participant’s own level of comfort when it comes to private information sharing and the selection of a proper tool/app as an alternative to the mainstream way of communication, the making of a conscious decision regarding the quantity and quality of the data that will be used for the surfing behaviour / use of online services are transmitted, weighing functionality, comfort, privacy and security
 * to discover users with similar interests in protecting privacy and offer them alternatives for communication with the participant
 * to motivate the usage of alternative tools/apps for everyday communication and the introduction of these topics to other people

Group discussion
The trainer starts the session by asking some questions to participants regarding the term “digital footprint”, encouraging the participants to discuss their views on disclosure/sharing of their personal data and sharing their knowledge on specific safety setting they are familiarized with or how to use them. The discussion is led by the following questions •	How big is your digital footprint? •	How do you feel about it? •	Do you make conscious decisions about the disclosure of your data? •	Do you know any special settings and do you use them? (Which) •	Who knows how much of me? This is important to establish a learning field where both trainer and participants come together to discuss a specific topic, safety on the Internet.

Introduction to the session
The trainer makes an introduction to the personal data sharing concept (disclosure of personal data, benefits of personal data disclosure). The input given by the trainer is led by the following questions:

 * How does the data exchange work?
 * Which data will be transmitted?
 * How they are used?
 * Who benefits from the disclosure of my data?
 * How do I benefit from disclosing my data?
 * What is "Dark Net"?

Then continues with “Tech talk”, which includes safety aspects of web browsers (settings, alternative browsers), cookies, cache, search engines (mainstream and alternative), messengers (mainstream and alternative), ISP (public, private), VPN, security (safe passwords, key cards, Remember a Sentence). This segment of the training session is supported by a slide presentation prepared in advance and shared with participants.

The tech talk is structured as follows:

Browser: Chrome, Safari, Bing, Firefox...

 * Alternatives: Brave Browser, Firefox Clear (Mobile Devices), Tor Browser (often used to enter the “Dark Net”)

Browser Settings: Auto Fill, Do-not-track

Cookies: Necessary, Session, Third Party Cookies

Cache: website data

Search Engines: Google, Bing ...

 * Alternatives: DuckDuckGo, Ecosia

Messenger: Whats App: Pros and Cons (Facebook)

 * Alternatives: Signal, Treema, Telegram, Encryption end-to-end

ISPs: Public PC / Wifi hotspots ; Private PC / Devices

 * Alternatives: Virtual Private Networks

Security: Safe Passwords, key manager

 * Method: Remember a Sentence
 * Key Manager example: Keepass2

Role Play
Participants from 4 groups. Each group represents a specific point of view in the discussion and considers arguments together: "I have nothing to hide" "The more the service providers know about me, the more the services will meet my needs." "In order to prevent possible misuse, you should divulge as little data as possible." "It's impossible to be anonymous on the Net."

Final discussion
The trainer and the participants will discuss the following questions to round up the session: -	What do you think about the pros and cons of anonymity in the digital world? -	Would you like to be less transparent? -	Should the Internet be more controlled and monitored?

Debriefing
To wrap up the session, the trainer will facilitate a debriefing moment where participants are encouraged to express their questions, doubts, ideas and feelings toward the topics discussed.

Evaluation
Participants will answer a small questionnaire to evaluate the session.

Overall duration of the session
1 hour

title: ICT4 Elderly/Alternatives for privacy


text:
Understanding Air Safety in the Jet Age/Bad Design, Bad Maintenance - TWA 800

The investigation that followed the midair explosion of TWA 800 on 17 July 1996 would be the longest, most complex and expensive in U.S. history. It would also prove to be controversial and give rein to accusations of cover-up and conspiracy. Ultimately though, the disaster would be shown to be due to the most prosaic of causes: bad design and shoddy maintenance.

Trans World Airlines Flight 800 was a Boeing 747-131. The aircraft, registration N93119, was manufactured in July 1971; it had been ordered by Eastern Air Lines, but after Eastern canceled its 747 orders, the plane was purchased new by Trans World Airlines. It had completed 16,869 flights with 93,303 hours of operation. The day of the accident, the plane departed from Athens and arrived at John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK) where it was refueled and the crew changed. The crew for the upcoming flight was 58-year-old Captain Ralph G. Kevorkian, with 18,800 flight hours, 57-year-old Captain/Check Airman Steven E. Snyder with 17,000 flight hours, and 63-year-old Flight Engineer/Check Airman Richard G. Campbell, as well as 25-year-old flight engineer trainee Oliver Krick, who was starting the sixth leg of his initial operating experience training. While Snyder was officially the captain, the planned flight was a training flight for Kevorkian and he was, therefore, seated in the captain's (left) seat.

The ground-maintenance crew locked out the thrust reverser for engine #3 because of technical problems with the thrust reverser sensors during the inbound landing at JFK, prior to Flight 800's departure. Additionally, severed cables for the engine #3 thrust reverser were replaced. During refueling of the aircraft, the volumetric shutoff (VSO) control was believed to have been triggered before the tanks were full. To continue the pressure fueling, a TWA mechanic overrode the automatic VSO by pulling the volumetric fuse and an overflow circuit breaker. Maintenance records indicate that the airplane had numerous VSO-related maintenance writeups in the weeks before the accident.

TWA 800 was scheduled to depart JFK for Charles de Gaulle Airport around 7:00 p.m., but the flight was delayed until 8:02 p.m. by a disabled piece of ground equipment and a passenger/baggage mismatch. After the owner of the baggage in question was confirmed to be on board, the flight crew prepared for departure and the aircraft pushed back from Gate 27 at the TWA Flight Center. The flight crew started the engines at 8:04 pm. however, because of the previous maintenance undertaken on engine #3, the flight crew only started engines #1, #2, and #4. Engine #3 was started ten minutes later at 8:14 pm. Taxi and takeoff proceeded uneventfully. TWA 800 then received a series of heading changes and generally increasing altitude assignments as it climbed to its intended cruising altitude. Weather in the area was benign with light winds and scattered clouds. The last radio transmission from the airplane occurred at 8:30 p.m. when the flight crew received and then acknowledged instructions from Boston Air Route Traffic Control Center to climb to 15,000 ft. The last recorded radar transponder return from the airplane was recorded by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) radar site at Trevose, Pennsylvania at 8:31:12 p.m.

What happened next stunned onlookers. Thirty-eight seconds after the last contact the captain of an Eastwind Airlines Boeing 737 reported to Boston ARTCC that he "just saw an explosion out here", adding, "we just saw an explosion up ahead of us here... about 16,000 ft or something like that, it just went down into the water." Subsequently, many air traffic control facilities in the New York/Long Island area received reports of an explosion from other pilots operating in the area. Many witnesses in the vicinity of the crash stated that they saw or heard explosions, accompanied by a large fireball or fireballs over the ocean, and observed debris, some of which was burning while falling into the water.

Various civilian, military, and police vessels reached the crash site and searched for survivors within minutes of the initial water impact, but found none, making TWA 800 the second-deadliest aircraft accident in United States history at that time.

The NTSB was notified about 8:50 p.m. the day of the accident; a full "go team" was assembled in Washington, D.C. and arrived on scene early the next morning. Meanwhile, initial witness descriptions led many to believe the cause of the crash was a bomb or surface-to-air missile attack. Given the potential for criminal causes, the FBI initiated a parallel investigation alongside the NTSB's accident investigation.

The search-and-rescue began immediately: a helicopter of the New York Air National Guard saw the explosion from approximately eight miles away, and arrived on scene so quickly that debris was still raining down, and the aircraft had to pull away. They reported their sighting to the tower at Suffolk County Airport. Later, remote-operated vehicles (ROVs), side-scan sonar, and laser line-scanning equipment were used to search for and investigate underwater debris fields. Victims and wreckage were recovered by scuba divers and ROVs; later scallop trawlers were used to recover wreckage embedded in the sea floor. In one of the largest diver-assisted salvage operations ever conducted, often working in very difficult and dangerous conditions, over 95% of the airplane wreckage was eventually recovered. The search and recovery effort identified three main areas of wreckage underwater :the yellow zone, red zone, and green zone contained wreckage from front, center, and rear sections of the airplane, respectively. The green zone with the tail section of the aircraft was located the furthest along the flight path.

Pieces of wreckage were transported by boat to shore and then by truck to leased hangar space at the former Grumman Aircraft facility in Calverton, New York, for storage, examination, and reconstruction. This facility became the command center and headquarters for the investigation. NTSB and FBI personnel were present to observe all transfers to preserve the evidentiary value of the wreckage. The cockpit voice recorder and flight data recorder were recovered by U.S. Navy divers one week after the accident; they were immediately shipped to the NTSB laboratory in Washington, D.C., for readout. The victims' remains were transported to the Suffolk County Medical Examiner's Office in Hauppauge, New York.

Tensions in the investigation
Relatives of TWA 800 passengers and crew, as well as the media, gathered at the Ramada Plaza JFK Hotel. Many waited until the remains of their family members had been recovered, identified, and released. This hotel became known as the "Heartbreak Hotel" for its role in handling families of victims of several airliner crashes.

Grief turned to anger at TWA's delay in confirming the passenger list, conflicting information from agencies and officials, and mistrust of the recovery operation's priorities. Although NTSB vice chairman Robert Francis stated that all bodies were being retrieved as soon as they were spotted, and that wreckage was being recovered only if divers believed that victims were hidden underneath, many families were suspicious that investigators were not being truthful, or withholding information.

Much anger and political pressure was also directed at Suffolk County Medical Examiner Dr. Charles V. Wetli as recovered bodies backlogged at the morgue. Under constant and considerable pressure to identify victims with minimal delay, pathologists worked non-stop. Since the primary objective was to identify all remains rather than performing a detailed forensic autopsy, the thoroughness of the examinations was highly variable. Ultimately, remains of all 230 victims were recovered and identified, the last over 10 months after the crash.

With lines of authority unclear, differences in agendas and culture between the FBI and NTSB resulted in discord. The FBI, from the start assuming that a criminal act had occurred, saw the NTSB as indecisive. Expressing frustration at the NTSB's unwillingness to speculate on a cause, one FBI agent described the NTSB as "No opinions. No nothing." Meanwhile, the NTSB was required to refute or play down speculation about conclusions and evidence, frequently supplied to reporters by law enforcement officials and politicians. The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, an invited party to the NTSB investigation, criticized the undocumented removal by FBI agents of wreckage from the hangar where it was stored.

Witness interviews
Although there were considerable discrepancies between different accounts, most witnesses to the accident had seen a "streak of light" that was described by 38 of 258 witnesses as ascending, moving to a point where a large fireball appeared, with several witnesses reporting that the fireball split in two as it descended toward the water. There was intense public interest in these witness reports and much speculation that the reported streak of light was a missile that had struck TWA 800, causing the airplane to explode. These witness accounts were a major reason for the initiation and duration of the FBI's criminal investigation.

Approximately 80 FBI agents conducted interviews with potential witnesses daily. No verbatim records of the witness interviews were produced; instead, the agents who conducted the interviews wrote summaries that they then submitted. Witnesses were not asked to review or correct the summaries. Included in some of the witness summaries were drawings or diagrams of what the witness observed. Witnesses were not allowed to testify at the court hearings.

Within days of the crash the NTSB announced its intent to form its own witness group and to interview witnesses to the crash. After the FBI raised concerns about non-governmental parties in the NTSB's investigation having access to this information and possible prosecutorial difficulties resulting from multiple interviews of the same witness, the NTSB deferred and did not interview witnesses to the crash. A Safety Board investigator later reviewed FBI interview notes and briefed other Board investigators on their contents. In November 1996, the FBI agreed to allow the NTSB access to summaries of witness accounts in which personally identifying information had been redacted and to conduct a limited number of witness interviews. In April 1998, the FBI provided the NTSB with the identities of the witnesses but due to the time elapsed a decision was made to rely on the original FBI documents rather than reinterview witnesses.

Further investigation and analysis
Examination of the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) and flight data recorder data showed a normal takeoff and climb, with the aircraft in normal flight  before both abruptly stopped at 8:31:12 pm. At 8:29:15 pm, Captain Kevorkian was heard to say, "Look at that crazy fuel flow indicator there on number four... see that?" A loud noise recorded on the last few tenths of a second of the CVR was similar to the last noises recorded from other airplanes that had experienced in-flight breakups. This, together with the distribution of wreckage and witness reports, all indicated a sudden catastrophic in-flight breakup of TWA 800.

Possible causes of the in-flight breakup
Investigators considered several possible causes for the structural breakup: structural failure and decompression, detonation of a high-energy explosive device, such as a missile warhead exploding either upon impact with the airplane, or just before impact, a bomb exploding inside the airplane, or a fuel-air explosion in the center wing fuel tank.

Structural failure and decompression
Close examination of the wreckage revealed no evidence of structural faults such as fatigue, corrosion or mechanical damage that could have caused the in-flight breakup. It was also suggested that the breakup could have been initiated by an in-flight separation of the forward cargo door like the disasters on board Turkish Airlines Flight 981 or United Airlines Flight 811, but all evidence indicated that the door was closed and locked at impact. The NTSB concluded that "the in-flight breakup of TWA flight 800 was not initiated by a preexisting condition resulting in a structural failure and decompression."

Missile or bomb detonation
A review of recorded data from long-range and airport surveillance radars revealed multiple contacts of airplanes or objects in TWA 800's vicinity at the time of the accident. None of these contacts intersected TWA 800's position at any time. Attention was drawn to data from the Islip, New York, ARTCC facility that showed three tracks in the vicinity of TWA 800 that did not appear in any of the other radar data. None of these sequences intersected TWA 800's position at any time either. All the reviewed radar data showed no radar returns consistent with a missile or other projectile traveling toward TWA 800.

The NTSB addressed allegations that the Islip radar data showed groups of military surface targets converging in a suspicious manner in an area around the accident, and that a 30-knot radar track, never identified and 3 nautical miles from the crash site, was involved in foul play, as evidenced by its failure to divert from its course and assist with the search and rescue operations. Military records examined by the NTSB showed no military surface vessels within 15 NM of TWA 800 at the time of the accident. In addition, the records indicated that the closest area scheduled for military use, warning area W-387A/B, was 160 NM south.

The NTSB reviewed the 30-knot target track to try to determine why it did not divert from its course and proceed to the area where the TWA 800 wreckage had fallen. TWA 800 was behind the target, and with the likely forward-looking perspective of the target's occupant(s), the occupants would not have been in a position to observe the aircraft's breakup or subsequent explosions or fireball(s). Additionally, it was unlikely that the occupants of the target track would have been able to hear the explosions over the sound of its engines and the noise of the hull traveling through water, even more so if the occupants were in an enclosed bridge or cabin. Further, review of the Islip radar data for other similar summer days and nights in 1999 indicated that the 30-knot track was consistent with normal commercial fishing, recreational, and cargo vessel traffic.

Trace amounts of explosive residue were detected on three samples of material from three separate locations of the recovered airplane wreckage (described by the FBI as a piece of canvas-like material and two pieces of a floor panel). These samples were submitted to the FBI's laboratory in Washington, D.C., which determined that one sample contained traces of cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine (RDX), another nitroglycerin, and the third a combination of RDX and pentaerythritol tetranitrate (PETN); these findings received much media attention at the time. In addition, the backs of several damaged passenger seats were observed to have an unknown red/brown-shaded substance on them. According to the seat manufacturer, the locations and appearance of this substance were consistent with adhesive used in the construction of the seats, and additional laboratory testing by NASA identified the substance as being consistent with adhesives.

Further examination of the airplane structure, seats, and other interior components found no damage typically associated with a high-energy explosion of a bomb or missile warhead ("severe pitting, cratering, petalling, or hot gas washing"). This included the pieces on which trace amounts of explosives were found. Of the 5 percent of the fuselage that was not recovered, none of the missing areas were large enough to have covered all the damage that would have been caused by the detonation of a bomb or missile. None of the victims' remains showed any evidence of injuries that could have been caused by high-energy explosives.

The NTSB considered the possibility that the explosive residue was due to contamination from the aircraft's use in 1991 transporting troops during the Gulf War or its use in a dog-training explosive detection exercise about one month before the accident. Testing conducted by the FAA's Technical Center indicated that residues of the type of explosives found on the wreckage would dissipate completely after two days of immersion in sea water (almost all recovered wreckage was immersed longer than two days). The NTSB concluded that it was "quite possible" that the explosive residue detected was transferred from military ships or ground vehicles, or the clothing and boots of military personnel, onto the wreckage during or after the recovery operation and was not present when the aircraft crashed into the water.

Although it was unable to determine the exact source of the trace amounts of explosive residue found on the wreckage, the lack of any other corroborating evidence associated with a high-energy explosion led the NTSB to conclude that "the in-flight breakup of TWA flight 800 was not initiated by a bomb or missile strike."

Fuel-air explosion in the center wing fuel tank
In order to evaluate the sequence of structural breakup of the airplane, the NTSB formed the Sequencing Group, which examined individual pieces of the recovered structure, two-dimensional reconstructions or layouts of sections of the airplane, and various-sized three-dimensional reconstructions of portions of the airplane. In addition, the locations of pieces of wreckage at the time of recovery and differences in fire effects on pieces that are normally adjacent to each other were evaluated. The Sequencing Group concluded that the first event in the breakup sequence was a fracture in the wing center section of the aircraft, caused by an "overpressure event" in the center wing fuel tank (CWT). An overpressure event was defined as a rapid increase in pressure resulting in failure of the structure of the CWT.

Because there was no evidence that an explosive device detonated in this (or any other) area of the airplane, this overpressure event could only have been caused by a fuel/air explosion in the CWT. There were 50 gal of fuel in the CWT of TWA 800; tests recreating the conditions of the flight showed the combination of liquid fuel and fuel/air vapor to be flammable. A major reason for the flammability of the fuel/air vapor in the CWT of the 747 was the large amount of heat generated and transferred to the CWT by air conditioning packs located directly below the tank; with the CWT temperature raised to a sufficient level, a single ignition source could cause an explosion.

Computer modeling and scale-model testing  were used to predict and demonstrate how an explosion would progress in a 747 CWT. During this time, quenching was identified as an issue, where the explosion would extinguish itself as it passed through the complex structure of the CWT. Because the research data regarding quenching was limited, a complete understanding of quenching behavior was not possible, and the issue of quenching remained unresolved.

In order to better determine whether a fuel/air vapor explosion in the CWT would generate sufficient pressure to break apart the fuel tank and lead to the destruction of the airplane, tests were conducted in July and August 1997, using a retired Air France 747 at Bruntingthorpe Airfield, England. These tests simulated a fuel/air explosion in the CWT by igniting a propane/air mixture; this resulted in the failure of the tank structure due to overpressure. While the NTSB acknowledged that the test conditions at Bruntingthorpe were not fully comparable to the conditions that existed on TWA 800 at the time of the accident, previous fuel explosions in the CWTs of commercial airliners such as Avianca Flight 203 and Philippine Airlines Flight 143 confirmed that a CWT explosion could break apart the fuel tank and lead to the destruction of an airplane.

Ultimately, based on "the accident airplane's breakup sequence; wreckage damage characteristics; scientific tests and research on fuels, fuel tank explosions, and the conditions in the CWT at the time of the accident; and analysis of witness information," the NTSB concluded that "the TWA flight 800 in-flight breakup was initiated by a fuel/air explosion in the CWT."

In-flight breakup sequence and crippled flight
Recovery locations of the wreckage from the ocean (the red, yellow, and green zones) clearly indicated that: (1) the red area pieces (from the forward portion of the wing center section and a ring of fuselage directly in front) were the earliest pieces to separate from the airplane; (2) the forward fuselage section departed simultaneously with or shortly after the red area pieces, landing relatively intact in the yellow zone; (3) the green area pieces (wings and the aft portion of the fuselage) remained intact for a period after the separation of the forward fuselage, and impacted the water in the green zone. Fire damage and soot deposits on the recovered wreckage indicated that some areas of fire existed on the airplane as it continued in crippled flight after the loss of the forward fuselage. After about 34 seconds (based on information from witness documents), the outer portions of both the right and left wings failed. Shortly after, the left wing separated from what remained of the main fuselage, which resulted in further development of the fuel-fed fireballs as the pieces of wreckage fell to the ocean.

Only the FAA radar facility in North Truro, Massachusetts, using specialized processing software from the United States Air Force 84th Radar Evaluation Squadron, was capable of estimating the altitude of TWA 800 after it lost power due to the CWT explosion. Because of accuracy limitations, this radar data could not be used to determine whether the aircraft climbed after the nose separated. Instead, the NTSB conducted a series of computer simulations to examine the flightpath of the main portion of the fuselage. Hundreds of simulations were run using various combinations of possible times the nose of TWA 800 separated (the exact time was unknown), different models of the behavior of the crippled aircraft (the aerodynamic properties of the aircraft without its nose could only be estimated), and longitudinal radar data (the recorded radar tracks of the east/west position of TWA 800 from various sites differed). These simulations indicated that after the loss of the forward fuselage the remainder of the aircraft continued in crippled flight, then pitched up while rolling to the left (north), climbing to a maximum altitude between 15537 and 16678 ft  from its last recorded altitude, 13760 ft.

Analysis of reported witness observations

At the start of FBI's investigation, because of the possibility that international terrorists might have been involved, assistance was requested from the CIA (US Central Intelligence Agency. CIA analysts, relying on sound-propagation analysis, concluded that the witnesses could not be describing a missile approaching an intact aircraft, but were seeing a trail of burning fuel coming from the aircraft after the initial explosion.  This conclusion was reached after calculating how long it took for the sound of the initial explosion to reach the witnesses, and using that to correlate the witness observations with the accident sequence.  In all cases the witnesses could not be describing a missile approaching an intact aircraft, as the plane had already exploded before their observations began.

As the investigation progressed, the NTSB decided to form a witness group to more fully address the accounts of witnesses. From November 1996 through April 1997 this group reviewed summaries of witness accounts on loan from the FBI (with personal information redacted), and conducted interviews with crewmembers from a New York Air National Guard HH-60 helicopter and C-130 airplane, as well as a U.S. Navy P-3 airplane that was flying in the vicinity of TWA 800 at the time of the accident.

In February 1998, the FBI, having closed its active investigation, agreed to fully release the witness summaries to the NTSB. With access to these documents no longer controlled by the FBI, the NTSB formed a second witness group to review the documents. Because of the amount of time that had elapsed (about 21 months) before the NTSB received information about the identity of the witnesses, the witness group chose not to re-interview the witnesses, but instead to rely on the original summaries of witness statements written by FBI agents as the best available evidence of the observations initially reported by the witnesses. Despite the two and a half years that had elapsed since the accident, the witness group did interview the captain of Eastwind Airlines Flight 507, who was the first to report the explosion of TWA 800, because of his vantage point and experience as an airline pilot. The NTSB's review of the released witness documents determined that they contained 736 witness accounts, of which 258 were characterized as "streak of light" witnesses ("an object moving in the sky... variously described [as] a point of light, fireworks, a flare, a shooting star, or something similar.") The NTSB Witness Group concluded that the streak of light reported by witnesses might have been the actual airplane during some stage of its flight before the fireball developed, noting that most of the 258 streak of light accounts were generally consistent with the calculated flightpath of the accident airplane after the CWT explosion.

Thirty-eight witnesses described a streak of light that ascended vertically, or nearly so, and these accounts "seem[ed] to be inconsistent with the accident airplane's flightpath." In addition, 18 witnesses reported seeing a streak of light that originated at the surface, or the horizon, which did not "appear to be consistent with the airplane's calculated flightpath and other known aspects of the accident sequence." Regarding these differing accounts, the NTSB noted that based on their experience in previous investigations "witness reports are often inconsistent with the known facts or with other witnesses' reports of the same events." The interviews conducted by the FBI focused on the possibility of a missile attack; suggested interview questions given to FBI agents such as "Where was the sun in relation to the aircraft and the missile launch point?" and "How long did the missile fly?" could have biased interviewees' responses in some cases. The NTSB concluded that given the large number of witnesses in this case, they "did not expect all of the documented witness observations to be consistent with one another" and "did not view these apparently anomalous witness reports as persuasive evidence that some witnesses might have observed a missile."

After missile visibility tests were conducted in April 2000, at Eglin Air Force Base, Fort Walton Beach, Florida, the NTSB determined that if witnesses had observed a missile attack they would have seen: Because of their unique vantage points or the level of precision and detail provided in their accounts, five witness accounts generated special interest: the pilot of Eastwind Airlines Flight 507, the crew members in the HH-60 helicopter, a streak-of-light witness aboard US Airways Flight 217, a land witness on the Beach Lane Bridge in Westhampton Beach, New York, and a witness on a boat near Great Gun Beach. Advocates of a missile-attack scenario asserted that some of these witnesses observed a missile; analysis demonstrated that the observations were not consistent with a missile attack on TWA 800, but instead were consistent with these witnesses having observed part of the in-flight fire and breakup sequence after the CWT explosion.
 * 1) a light from the burning missile motor ascending very rapidly and steeply for about 8 seconds;
 * 2) the light disappearing for up to 7 seconds;
 * 3) upon the missile striking the aircraft and igniting the CWT, another light, moving considerably more slowly and more laterally than the first, for about 30 seconds;
 * 4) this light descending while simultaneously developing into a fireball falling toward the ocean.  None of the witness documents described such a scenario.

The NTSB concluded that "the witness observations of a streak of light were not related to a missile and that the streak of light reported by most of these witnesses was burning fuel from the accident airplane in crippled flight during some portion of the post-explosion, preimpact breakup sequence". The NTSB further concluded that "the witnesses' observations of one or more fireballs were of the airplane's burning wreckage falling toward the ocean".

Possible ignition sources of the center wing fuel tank
To determine what ignited the flammable fuel-air vapor in the CWT and caused the explosion, the NTSB evaluated numerous potential ignition sources. All but one were considered very unlikely to have been the source of ignition.

Missile fragment or small explosive charge
Although the NTSB had already reached the conclusion that a missile strike did not cause the structural failure of the airplane, the possibility that a missile could have exploded close enough to TWA 800 for a missile fragment to have entered the CWT and ignited the fuel/air vapor, yet far enough away not to have left any damage characteristic of a missile strike, was considered. Computer simulations using missile performance data simulated a missile detonating in a location such that a fragment from the warhead could penetrate the CWT. Based on these simulations, the NTSB concluded that it was "very unlikely" that a warhead detonated in such a location where a fragment could penetrate the CWT, but no other fragments impact the surrounding airplane structure leaving distinctive impact marks.

Similarly, the investigation considered the possibility that a small explosive charge placed on the CWT could have been the ignition source. Testing by the NTSB and the British Defence Evaluation and Research Agency demonstrated that when metal of the same type and thickness of the CWT was penetrated by a small charge, there was petalling of the surface where the charge was placed, pitting on the adjacent surfaces, and visible hot gas washing damage in the surrounding area. Since none of the recovered CWT wreckage exhibited these damage characteristics, and none of the areas of missing wreckage were large enough to encompass all the expected damage, the investigation concluded that this scenario was "very unlikely."

Other potential sources
The NTSB also investigated whether the fuel/air mixture in the CWT could have been ignited by lightning strike, meteor strike, auto-ignition or hot surface ignition, a fire migrating to the CWT from another fuel tank via the vent system, an uncontained engine failure, a turbine burst in the air conditioning packs beneath the CWT, a malfunctioning CWT jettison/override pump, a malfunctioning CWT scavenger pump, or static electricity. After analysis the investigation determined that these potential sources were "very unlikely" to have been the source of ignition.

Fuel quantity indication system
Because a combustible fuel/air mixture will always exist in fuel tanks, Boeing designers had attempted to eliminate all possible sources of ignition in the 747's tanks. To do so, all devices are protected from vapor intrusion, and voltages and currents used by the Fuel Quantity Indication System (FQIS) are kept very low. In the case of the 747-100 series, the only wiring located inside the CWT is that which is associated with the FQIS.

In order for the FQIS to have been Flight 800's ignition source, a transfer of higher-than-normal voltage to the FQIS would have needed to occur, as well as some mechanism whereby the excess energy was released by the FQIS wiring into the CWT. While the NTSB determined that factors suggesting the likelihood of a short circuit event existed, they added that "neither the release mechanism nor the location of the ignition inside the CWT could be determined from the available evidence." Nonetheless, the NTSB concluded that "the ignition energy for the CWT explosion most likely entered the CWT through the FQIS wiring".

Though the FQIS itself was designed to prevent danger by minimizing voltages and currents, the innermost tube of Flight 800's FQIS compensator showed damage similar to that of the compensator tube identified as the ignition source for the surge tank fire that destroyed a 747 near Madrid in 1976. This was not considered proof of a source of ignition. Evidence of arcing was found in a wire bundle that included FQIS wiring connecting to the center wing tank. Arcing signs were also seen on two wires sharing a cable raceway with FQIS wiring at station 955.

The captain's cockpit voice recorder channel showed two "dropouts" of background power harmonics in the second before the recording ended (with the separation of the nose). This might well be the signature of an arc on cockpit wiring adjacent to the FQIS wiring. The captain commented on the "crazy" readings of the number 4 engine fuel flow gauge about 2 1/2 minutes before the CVR recording ended. Finally, the Center Wing Tank fuel quantity gauge was recovered and indicated 640 pounds instead of the 300 pounds that had been loaded into that tank. Experiments showed that applying power to a wire leading to the fuel quantity gauge can cause the digital display to change by several hundred pounds before the circuit breaker trips. Thus the gauge anomaly could have been caused by a short to the FQIS wiring. The NTSB concluded that the most likely source of sufficient voltage to cause ignition was a short from damaged wiring, or within electrical components of the FQIS. As not all components and wiring were recovered, it was not possible to pinpoint the source of the necessary voltage.

Report conclusions
The NTSB investigation ended with the adoption of the board's final report on August 23, 2000. The Board determined that the probable cause of the TWA 800 accident was: "[An] explosion of the center wing fuel tank (CWT), resulting from ignition of the flammable fuel/air mixture in the tank. The source of ignition energy for the explosion could not be determined with certainty, but, of the sources evaluated by the investigation, the most likely was a short circuit outside of the CWT that allowed excessive voltage to enter it through electrical wiring associated with the fuel quantity indication system."

In addition to the probable cause, the NTSB found the following contributing factors to the accident: "* The design and certification concept that fuel tank explosions could be prevented solely by precluding all ignition sources.
 * The certification of the Boeing 747 with heat sources located beneath the CWT with no means to reduce the heat transferred into the CWT or to render the fuel tank vapor non-combustible."

During the course of its investigation, and in its final report, the NTSB issued fifteen safety recommendations, mostly covering fuel tank and wiring-related issues. Among the recommendations was that significant consideration should be given to the development of modifications such as nitrogen-inerting systems for new airplane designs and, where feasible, for existing airplanes.


text:
German/Grammar/Personal pronouns

Personal pronouns
We're going to organize the material here by starting with the basic elements and then discussing how to put them together into more and more complex and interesting combinations. The first step will be personal pronouns, the most basic type of pronoun. With these, and a few verbs, to be covered in the next section, you can start forming your own sentences without actually knowing a lot of vocabulary.

Terminology
Personal pronouns are the small words used to refer to someone or something else without using the name. For example, "I", "you", "she" and "it" are personal pronouns in English. Personal pronouns are one category of pronouns; as you might guess, there are other categories including impersonal pronouns as well as a few other types which will be covered elsewhere. Pronouns, in turn, can be used to form a noun phrase, the phrases that tell you what a sentence talks about, as opposed to verbs which describe the action that is taking place.

Which personal pronoun to use in a German sentence depends on four factors, the case, the person, the number, and in some cases, the gender. There are four cases in German, whose functions will be covered later, and to avoid information overload we’ll only be talking about what it called the nominative case in this section. Person identifies whether the pronoun is referring to the person speaking (first person), the person being spoken to (second person), or some other person or thing not included in the conversation (third person). For example, in English "I" is first person, "you" is second person, and "he" is third person. Number is the distinction between one (singular) and more than one (plural), for example "I" is singular and "we" is plural. In German, gender only applies to the third person (as in English). It refers to the grammatical gender which, as mentioned in the introduction, is different than the natural gender ("he", "she", "it") used in English.

First person
The first person personal pronouns in German are ich ("I") and wir ("we"). As in English, which one to use depends only on number. So if you’re taking about yourself alone then you use the first person singular, ich, and if you’re talking about yourself as included in a group of people then you use the first person plural, wir. Note that ich is only capitalized at the start of a sentence.

Second person familiar versus polite
Unlike English, but like many other languages, the German second person comes in two flavors, familiar and polite. In normal conversation, familiar is used with family, friends, coworkers you know well, small children, etc. Polite is used with strangers and people for whom you want to show respect. But there are no exact criteria for when to use familiar vs. polite, so there is a large grey area and when in doubt you should listen to how you are addressed and how your peers address others.

Second person familiar
The second person familiar personal pronouns are du (singular) and ihr (plural). So if you're referring to just the person you're talking to then use du, and if you're referring to a group of people including the person you're talking to then use ihr. Note that, unlike English, German makes a distinction between second person singular and second person plural. (Some varieties of English have a second person plural, for example in American Southern English the plural form "y'all" is often used.)

Second person polite
The only second person polite personal pronouns is Sie (singular and plural). First note that this is always capitalized, similar to the way that the English "I" is always capitalized. In this case, as with English "you", there is no distinction between singular are plural.

Third person
There are three third person singular personal pronouns in German, one for each of the three German genders. They are er (masculine singular), sie (feminine singular), es (neuter singular). The third person plural pronoun is the same as the feminine, sie, but this should be regarded as a coincidence. In general, while there is a certain correlation between feminine and plural forms, there are are enough exceptions that you should not take this to be any kind of rule. Note that in spoken German, sie and Sie sound the same, so without additional context it's impossible to tell the two apart. This ambiguity also occurs when the word is at beginning of a sentence. One way to tell the difference in meaning is by the way the verb is conjugated, since the different meanings of sie/Sie require different verb conjugations.

Introduction to gender
As mentioned in the introduction, and hinted at above, German genders are very different from English genders. We shall use masculine, feminine and neuter for the German genders, and male, female, and inanimate for English genders. English genders are natural, meaning that you can determine the gender of the word from the thing it refers to: male for male people and animals, female for female people and animals, and inanimate for everything else. But German, like many other European languages, uses grammatical gender, which usually has more to do with how the word has evolved over time than with its meaning. Because of this, there is no way to translate between "he/she/it" and er/sie/es without first figuring out what these pronouns are referring to. For people, especially adults, masculine and feminine generally correspond to male and female. For example: For inanimate objects you have to know its grammatical gender to work out which pronoun to use. Similarly, with animals and children the German gender may be different than the natural gender.
 * Wo ist der Mann? Er ist draußen. ― "Where is the man? He is outside."
 * Wo ist die Frau? Sie ist drinnen. ― "Where is the woman? She is inside."
 * Wo ist der Stein? Er liegt auf dem Boden. ― "Where is the stone? It is on the ground."
 * Wo ist das Auto? Es steht auf der Straße. ― "Where is the car? It is on the street."
 * Wo ist die Schale? Sie steht auf dem Tisch. ― "Where is the bowl? It is on the table."
 * Wo ist die Katze? Sie liegt auf dem Sofa. ― "Where is the cat? He is on the sofa." (Assuming he's a male cat.)
 * Wo ist der Hund? Er liegt auf dem Bett. ― "Where is the dog? She is on the bed." (Assuming she's a female dog.)
 * Wo ist das Baby? Es schläft. ― "Where is the baby? She is sleeping." (Assuming she's a girl.)
 * Wo ist das Baby? Es schläft. ― "Where is the baby? He is sleeping." (Assuming he's a boy.)

Note: For some animals there are different words that only refer to the male or female of the species. For example, just as in English the word "tomcat" refers specifically to a male cat, the German word Kater refers specifically to a male cat. In such cases the gender of the noun matches the natural gender of the animal. However, constantly calling your pet cat a Kater would sound just as odd in German as constantly calling him a tomcat would be in English. English speakers often have a hard time accepting, for example, that a male animal might be called "she". But keep in mind that "she" and sie are different words with different meanings, so German speakers are actually calling the animal sie, which is a different matter and they don't really see this as an inconsistency.

One may well ask, if you can't tell the gender from what the word means, then how do you tell what gender it is. The good news is that the gender of many words can be determined using a few relatively simple rules. In fact there are more such rules than are actually useful since some are only applicable to rare technical words, and some have so many exceptions that memorizing them takes more effort than you save by applying the rule when it actually works. The bad news is that there is a core vocabulary of words, including some of the most common ones, that don't seem to follow any pattern at all in terms of gender. For these the best you can do is to memorize the gender when you learn the word.

Summary table
The above is summarized in the following table.

title: German/Grammar/Personal pronouns


text:
User talk:41.113.168.55

I have given some information that was not in the main page.i have improved the page by giving some information that i know to be better to read and understood

title: User talk:41.113.168.55


text:
User:Mcleod pebbles

“Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people.” ― Henry Thomas Buckle

Hello, my Name is Pebbles I'm A first-year college student new to Wikibook.

title: User:Mcleod pebbles


text:
Perspectives in Digital Literacy/Digital Cult

"If you want to be happy, learn to be alone without being lonely. Learn that being alone does not mean being unhappy. The world is full of plenty of interesting and enjoyable things to do and people who can enrich your life.
 * -Michael Josephson"

"Dating is about finding out who you are and who others are. If you show up in a masquerade outfit, neither is going to happen.
 * -Henry Cloud"

In 1993, Gary Kremen saw the future in online dating; he knew the need for love was ubiquitous, so in 1995 he launched the first online dating site, Match.com, an online community where singles could connect; the rest was history. Today, tens of millions invest in dating sites every year; it seems everyone is looking for love online. According to a 2019 Pew Research Center survey, three in ten U.S. adults say they have used an online dating site or app. And while technology has made it easier to find a potential partner, it has also reduced singles from three-dimensional people to two-dimensional displays of information. Dating apps have also resulted in cognitive overload. It is almost like a video game in which we do not select people; we are selecting options. As singles continue to sign up, the corporations flourish while their customers become more socially or romantically awkward.

In the online dating world, the chances of people getting married are few. Roughly only 12 percent of online dating sites users reported marriage or long term commitment. In some instances, the relationship leads to friendship, but many end up in heartbreak. Part of the problem is that while it is comfortable to sit behind the computer and converse, it can potentially lead people to be socially awkward if all they do is communicate via online chat. People who use online dating sites should make it a habit to get to a level where they can share via telephone and eventually plan an in-person date. The notion of only communicating via messages and having no personal interaction can ultimately lead to not speaking in person.

In her 2012 TEDTalk “Connected, but Alone?,” Sherry Turkle, Professor of the Social Studies of Science and Technology at MIT, discusses how our excessive reliance on online communication is making us less capable of deep interpersonal connections. Turkle is concerned that people do not know how to be alone anymore. We rely on technology to find attention whenever we need it, which leads to a false sense of security. And the more we dive into technology to feel secure, the more we lose our sense of reality. Hiding from real life has become easy; texting, email, and social media has allowed us to create the version of ourselves that we want to be. People have become accustomed to one-word text and short emails so much that we sacrifice deep conversations and getting to know people. Thereby the paradox: online dating can be successful for a person who already knows how to communicate in real life.

Match Algorithms
Online dating has been a catalyst for matchmaking for over twenty years, yet people are still dissatisfied with their relationships’ stature. There may be a commercial reason for that. Violet Lim has been in the dating industry for over fourteen years. The online matchmaking she founded with her husband has matched over 100,000 singles. In her August 2018 TEDxntu talk, Lim spoke of how dating algorithms’ created by companies like Match Group, the primary purpose is not to match you with your “perfect mate.” “swipe left” “ swipe right” every year, billions are swiping. Algorithms are set up to keep you in an endless cycle of matches to keep singles logged in longer. But with more matches comes more rejection - which can lead to being more disconnected or lonely. Lim points out that we may be so caught up in superficial criteria that we lose focus on significant criteria such as kindness, reliability, and trustworthiness. Thus many different dating websites can be a trap for everyone looking for rush rewards and gratification, especially now that it has become the “it thing” to date online. Even Facebook added an online dating option in 2016. So while Facebook originally was a way to connect with families and friends worldwide, it is now trending to make love connections.

Swiping Risk
While searching for love, online singles can put themselves at risk, at risk of identity theft, online harassment, and scammers. The instabilities and cruelty of society far too often have the dating scene appearing distorted. Lim explains that not everything on dating apps is accurate and that it is difficult to get an exact representation of a person from possibly altered photos. The MTV reality-TV documentary Catfish which examines the truths and lies of online relationships is a perfect example of this. This show has shown people falling in love, only for the person on the other side of the computer to refuse to meet on FaceTime and, in some cases, talk on the phone. All these are major red flags that should not be ignored, but far too often, singles get caught up in wanting to find love, and when they have exhausted all other options, and ignore the red flags. Red flags are not always apparent: scammers will request personal information such as your address, pretending to send you romantic gifts. Still, in all actuality, they want to steal your personal information. According to the FBI annual 2019 Internet Crime Report, 19,473 people were victims of romance scams. A romance scam is usually a fake profile that scammers create to gain their victim’s trust and scam them out of money.

The Bots
Additionally, before stepping into the online dating world, you need to know yourself, what you are looking for, and, most importantly, why you choose online dating versus the option of organically meeting someone the traditional way. Lim agrees that dating apps are meant to connect people, but all the generic profiles and faulty algorithms make it harder. The companies who run OkCupid, Tinder, Plenty of Fish, and Match.com are all interested in the same thing: click for profit. Lim gives an example of a single man signing up for a dating app; he receives a message from what seems an attractive young lady, but then he must pay when he tries to reply. And while many singles do so thinking they are responding to genuine messages, it’s an automated message sent by a bot. Some dating apps even create bots to lure users into paying.

Online dating comes with many issues. Let us take Josh Rivera, the editor for USA Today, who dives right into bots and online dating scams in his article "You may be matching with a bot." Users Carlos Zavala from Washington DC and Frankie Heart in Tokyo said they had seen bots on dating apps, even more now during the coronavirus pandemic. Like all chatbots, dating-app bots are coded software that simulates a "chat" with users by utilizing natural language processing. These bots can be so advanced that many people fall for these tactics. Ruby Gonzalez, head of communications at NordVPN Virtual security, warns users that "Despite Tinder being one of the smoothest and easiest-to-use dating apps, it's full of fake accounts and bots that can ruin the whole user experience."

The Illusion
While dating apps are a platform for finding love, it may all be an illusion; some singles are going online looking to feel desirable. In 2010, John C. Bridges, a professor, writer, and speaker, wrote The Illusion of Intimacy, covering the online dating process, intimacy issues, and how illusion and fantasy distort reality and shared online dating problems. Describing online dating as the “new form of hope,” Bridges claims that in the online world, people are likely to engage in behaviors they usually would not in the real world because they are behind a veil. In chapter four of his book, Bridges explains that “[his] interviewees tell stories of people who have deliberately posted old photos of themselves that are not accurate representations of how they appear today or have posted photos that are simply the most flattering." The online dating world is all about perfection, searching for the “perfect relationship,” where in reality, there is no such a thing as a “perfect relationship.” According to the Pew Research Center, about seven in ten online daters claim it is common for those who use online platforms to lie to appear more desirable. There are many fake profiles on dating sites, even some planted by dating sites to lure users. That kind of deception and false hope can affect users. About 45 percent of Americans who used dating apps say they were left feeling disappointed.

 Love Lockdown

Since there are so many online dating problems, one must ask whether online dating is worth it in the long run? It is essential to understand why we feel the need to turn to these platforms. For example, we were hit by the coronavirus pandemic earlier this year, which has changed how people socialize because they must quarantine, socially isolate themselves, and find other ways to spend their time. The use of dating apps has grown because of being forced to stay at home. Tinder, one of the most common dating apps, has seen a significant increase in user engagement. Tinder claims that since being told to quarantine due to coronavirus in March 2020, users have sent an average of 52 percent more messages. In the article “College students are still finding romance in a pandemic, through Zoom crushes and actual dates,” author Annabelle Williams discusses the shift in campus dating due to the coronavirus. Some schools prohibit close contact with anyone outside of roommates; other schools like the University of Georgia recommend students wear masks while hooking up--then withdrew their statements when met with ridicule. Williams explains that traditional dating that allows you to present yourself during an actual interaction has ceased to exist. She claims dorm hookups, once a staple of college, has mostly become a thing of the past. She refers to “masked first dates being the new norm. She explains that the shift in campus life makes it harder to find romantic partners, social circles, lab partners, and gym partners, and all have been virtually replaced by Zoom and dating apps. And while some students are coping, some are getting bored. Scout Turkle, a senior at the University of California, Berkeley, says the pandemic has made what she calls “convenient intimacies less available. Turkle has been hooking up with her housemates because she says, "it does feel like a huge deal to lose [her] only clear opportunity for physical intimacy during a time it does not feel available to [her]." Williams explains that this desire for intimacy is why dating apps on campus are increasing in popularity. For students, the pandemic is a cause for concern when dating because in-person contact can pose a health risk, and dorm restrictions do not make it any easier. Research before the pandemic had already shown a connection between loneliness and compulsive app use among students. According to a new study conducted by Kathryn Caduto, a doctoral student in communication at The Ohio State University, single people who use dating apps on their phones suffer from loneliness and social anxiety. The user experience was recorded in the article "What compulsive dating-app users have in common," written by Jeff Grabmeier, senior director of Research Communications at Ohio State University. A total of 269 undergraduate students participated in the study. The participants were asked a series of questions to gauge their isolation and anxiety using dating apps. Those who already showed signs of stress agreed more to statements like "I am more confident socializing on dating apps than offline." The results did not surprise Caduto; she says, "[i]t's a problem [she] has seen firsthand. The lonelier users are, the more likely they are to go on dating apps." People with higher levels of social anxiety chose to meet people on dating apps rather than in person. They also preferred socializing with their app matches without meeting face-to-face. Researchers found that users who are depressed are more likely to turn to dating apps for affirmation, which leads to more negative outcomes. Participants also reported missing work and class because of their frequent monitoring of dating apps.

Conclusion
Dating apps offer limitless possible matches at your fingertips, turning an intimate experience into something more like a video game. Online dating can be overwhelming, even daunting. You have no idea what the person you are e-mailing looks like or what they are like personally. Since internet dating starts online, some people share photographs from several years ago, while others do not have such exciting pictures; photos do not always represent reality. I think it's fair to assume, though, online dating has its pros: it's easy, universal, and discreet, but it also has its drawbacks, such as dishonest people or cybercrime. Is one outweighing the other? I think it depends on what you are searching for and what you are looking for. More so, what has been your past dating history? Things move at a different pace in digital reality. Knowing someone online for two weeks may feel like a lifetime, and you may feel ready for a romantic relationship too soon. While the ability to choose how much your future partner goes out, what kind of food they eat, and what type of work they do can sound appealing, you should be more concerned with forming a real relationship. As the industry continues to expand, some experts question whether dating app companies are genuinely interested in making love connections. Or do they want to keep people in an endless, endless loop of searching and matching?

Glossary
Algorithm: A process or set of rules to be followed in calculations or other problem-solving operations, especially by a computer.

 * The algorithms that match various users have become much quicker and more convenient than ever before to find a possible date.

Gratification: Pleasure, especially when gained from the satisfaction of a desire.

 * Do you wonder we expect immediate and instant gratification that comes with online dating? It's because we have websites that date for us.

Interpersonal: Relating to relationships or communication between people.

 * Online dating has altered the way interpersonal relationships are formed.

Pandemic: (Of a disease) prevalent over a whole country or the world.

 * COVID-19 Pandemic has  many singles on mobile dating apps as a way to explore their choices while social distancing.

Reliance: Dependence on or trust in someone or something.

 * Singles are spending more time keeping up with all these applications, earnestly searching for love and unsure where else to look for it. However, users must be made aware of the potential reliance on dating apps.

Representations: The description or portrayal of someone or something in a particular way or as being of a certain nature.

 * The way singles represent themselves in person does not always correlate with how others interpret there Dating profiles.

Simulates : Produce a computer model of.

Ubiquitous: Present, appearing, or found everywhere.

 * The most accessible way to meet individuals is through dating apps. However, as dating apps become more ubiquitous, Singles must decide they are getting genuine matches.

On romance scams

 * Phan, Anh, Kathryn Seigfried-Spellar, and Kim-Kwang Raymond Choo. “Threaten Me Softly: A Review of Potential Dating App Risks.” Computers in Human Behavior Reports 3 (2021). An assessment of the cybersecurity risks of dating apps and examination of mitigation strategies.

 * Rege, Aunshul. “What’s Love Got to Do with It? Exploring Online Dating Scams and Identity Fraud.” International Journal of Cyber Criminology, vol. 3, no. 2, July 2009, pp. 494–512. An overview of romance scams and identity fraud at dating sites, with a typology of romance scammers.
 * Rochadiat, Annisa M. P., et al. “The Outsourcing of Online Dating: Investigating the Lived Experiences of Online Dating Assistants Working in the Contemporary Gig Economy.” Social Media + Society, July 2020. How online daters are outsourcing the tasks of their online dating to online dating assistants.
 * Whitty, Monica T. and Tom Buchanan. "The online dating romance scam: The psychological impact on victims - both financial and non-financial." Criminology & Criminal Justice, vol. 16, no. 2, 2016, pp. 176-194.

On the effect of online dating during a pandemic

 * MacKenzie, Sigalos. “Why the coronavirus might change dating forever.” CNBC.com May 25, 2020. Distanced courtship is not just helping solve coronavirus but the problem of loneliness.
 * Vinopal, Courtney. "Coronavirus has changed online dating. Here’s why some say that’s a good thing." PBS NewsHour. Mwy 15, 2020. The pandemic has slowed things down, encouraging couples to get to know each other and engage in deep conversation.

Discussion Questions

 * Is algorithmic matchmaking useful or is it a smokescreen to make users feel that their matches are based on fact and logic? Considering that the algorithms of many social media seem to include variable-ratio schedules of reinforcement to addict us to use their services, how do we know that dating algorithms work to fulfill the best interest of customers?
 * How does swiping through hundreds of eligible profiles affect our experience of romance? Is this shopping approach to love exciting or chilling?
 * Is it ethical or even desirable to hire a dating assistant to manage one's online dating experience?
 * Are the intentions of dating online pure? It can be an exciting and enjoyable way to meet potential partners by exploring the world of Internet dating. You may quickly discover, however, profiles are not as they seem. When dating online, singles have to be aware of potential red flags and scammers.
 * When it comes to modern-day romance, the 21st century is now hitting its height. The handwritten love letters will no longer exist, and going out into the real world to look for love is gone. With the current coronavirus pandemic, how will it impact online dating?


text:
Template:Color box/doc

Supporting template

 * Greater color contrast ratio

title: Template:Color box/doc


text:
User:Senseilar1998

Shotokan Sensei Created by Sensei Gichin funakosi

title: User:Senseilar1998


text: Category:Book:Perspectives in Digital Literacy


text: Template:Editnotices/Group/Perspectives in Digital Literacy


text: Template:Greater color contrast ratio

title: Template:Greater color contrast ratio


text: Template:Color contrast

title: Template:Color contrast


text:
Template:Color contrast/doc

Usage
The template computes color contrast between two RGB colors per WCAG 2.0. The value varies between 1 for identical colors to 21 for maximally contrasting colors (black and white).

The template accepts six unnamed parameters r1, g1, b1, r2, g2, b2 (in this order), representing the RGB color coordinates of the first and second colors. If six parameters are provided, then the template returns the contrast value as described above. There is an additional seventh parameter which can set various minimum contrast levels; if contrast is equal or greater than the provided value, the template will instead return "1" and "0" if not.

Alternatively, the template accepts two parameters representing the HEX codes of two colors, and returns same result.

Examples:

→   →    →    →    →    →

title: Template:Color contrast/doc


text: Template:Infobox color

title: Template:Infobox color


title: Template:Hex2dec


text: Template:Rounddown

title: Template:Rounddown


text: Template:Border

title: Template:Border


text: Template:Format TemplateData

title: Template:Format TemplateData