W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2009

Re: simple shorthand syntax proposal

From: Philip TAYLOR (Ret'd) <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 14:26:45 +0000
Message-ID: <498AF725.9020509@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
To: "Dailey, David P." <david.dailey@sru.edu>
CC: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>, public-html@w3.org, oedipus@hicom.net


Dailey, David P. wrote:

 > Reducing keystrokes helps with legibility of the code.

I think that that is a personal, and very challengeable,
position.  My personal (and equally challengeable)
position is that a name (tag) that is inherently
meaningful is preferable to one whose meaning is
opaque.  If I may refer to a parallel thread,
initiated by (I think) Gregory Rosmaita, Gregory
is arguing that <dialog> should be reduced to <d>;
whilst I sympathise with his case, I feel that <dlg>
would address his concerns, is far more memorable,
and would therefore lead to better legibility in the
code in which it is used.  On the same basis, I am
less than convinced that <c> is preferable to <span>,
particuarly since HWL has subsequently clarified that
it would not delimit a stretch of characters, but
rather anything that <span> can currently delimit,
at which point its very name (or the name from which
it is derived) becomes inappropriate.

On the other hand, I have no objection to the <TAG.class>
or <TAG.identifier> syntax, so long as it does not
conflict with the deeper syntax of the language.

Philip TAYLOR
Received on Thursday, 5 February 2009 14:27:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:29 GMT