W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > February 2004

ORA-XQ-057-E: Inconsistent use of bolding

From: Stephen Buxton <Stephen.Buxton@oracle.com>
Date: 17 Feb 04 08:06:11
Message-Id: <200402171606.i1HG6BG22352@rgmgw5.us.oracle.com>
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Cc:

SECTION no specific location

Words and phrases appear in bold throughout the document.
There is no description of the convention being followed.
It appears to be that a bolded word or phrase has a formal
definition somewhere.  There does not appear to be a consistent
convention about whether a bolded phrase is appearing in its
own definition, or the definition is merely being referenced.
For example, most of the bolded words in section 2 "Basics"
appear within the [Definition:...] convention, which is fairly
self-explanatory (although widely misused for things that are
not really definitions at all, but that is the 
subject of other comments).  On the other hand, in section 3.7.3 
"Computed constructors", the phrases "name expression" and
"content expression" are bolded, and their definitions are here,
though not enclosed in the [Definition: ...] convention.
These same phrases appear in other passages in bold, where they
are to be understood as references back to the definition. 
The point is that there is no consistency about how to tell 
whether a use of bolding indicates a definition, or a reference
to a definition.  By way of contrast, a common convention is that
a term is italicized when it is being defined, and not italicized
when it is being referenced.

- Steve B.
Received on Tuesday, 17 February 2004 11:09:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:45:17 UTC