W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > January to March 2007

Re: Brainstorming - abbreviations

From: Colin Lieberman <colin@cactusflower.org>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 19:24:43 -0400
Message-Id: <22002419.147731174001083490.JavaMail.servlet@perfora>
To: <w3c@robertdot.org>
To: <asbjorn@ulsberg.no>
Cc: <public-html@w3.org>

>We have, e.g., <em> and <strong> and the differences between the two seem
>less clear than the difference between <acronym> and <abbr>.  That is,
>there is a clear time to use an acronym and an abbr according to a
>particular definition, while the line between emphasis and strong is very
>fuzzy.

The em/strong/b/i situation is certainly worthy of its own thread;  I'll give dollars to doughnuts there are some strong thoughts on the issue, but the point is well taken.

>> I don't find the difference between abbreviations and acronym important
>>  enough to maintain it in a technical standard as HTML. Thus, I suggest
>>  both be replaced with a single element:
>>
>>    <short>
>
>That's a fine idea.  Basically, what you've done is thrown out both
>specific meanings in favor of an equally easy to type element.

I can get behind this logic, except that I don't see a reason to create a new element: abbreviated & short are nearly synonymous. Why not just say <abbr> is for any abbreviated form?
Received on Thursday, 15 March 2007 23:24:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 15 March 2007 23:25:00 GMT