W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > spec-prod@w3.org > October to December 2001

Re: Parens and brackets for links

From: Susan Lesch <lesch@w3.org>
Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 01:05:39 -0700
Message-Id: <p05100311b7ed90c03bba@[192.168.123.102]>
To: "Ishida, Richard" <Richard.Ishida@gbr.xerox.com>, "'spec-prod@w3.org'" <spec-prod@w3.org>
Cc: "'i18n-editor@w3.org'" <i18n-editor@w3.org>
Hello, Richard,

>  The Manual of Style includes the following example:
>
>  ... as is done for the 'page' property of CSS2 ([CSS2], section 13.3.2).
>
>  The question recently arose, should be parens be used when there is no "...
>  section 13.3.2"? (They are not used by the Manual of Style).

Maybe the introduction to punctuation in the Chicago Manual 5.2 applies:

  "The tendency to use all the punctuation that the grammatical
   structure of the material suggests is referred to as close (klos)
   punctuation. It is a practice that was more common in the past, and
   though it may be helpful when the writing is elaborate, it can,
   when misused, produce an uninviting choppiness. There is a tendency
   today, on the other hand, to punctuate only when necessary to
   prevent misreading. Most contemporary writers and editors lean
   toward this open style of punctuation yet preserve a measure of
   subjectivity and discretion."

Is that enough to support your view?

I admit to using some extra commas in my life.

>  Eg.
>  ... as applications of XML 1.0 [XML].
>
>  or
>
>  ... as applications of XML 1.0 ([XML]).

The first looks preferable.

>  The above being different from:
>
>  for specifications such as [XML 1.0] and [CSS2].

Here we cut a corner too quickly. What do you think of this instead?

   for specifications such as XML 1.0 [XML1] and CSS2 [CSS2].

>  (I prefer no parens).

I agree.
Received on Saturday, 13 October 2001 04:08:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 10 March 2012 06:19:11 GMT