- From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
- Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 07:22:14 -0800
- To: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>, w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org
At 10:29 AM 11/18/00 -0500, Al Gilman wrote:
>Acronyms should be recognized as a distinguished subcategory of
>abbreviations, not (in natural language usage) as a separate category
>outside the category of abbreviations.
I just couldn't resist this opportunity to emphasize this apparently little
understood (overlooked?) truth.
The really important thing is to assure the implementation of this feature
and if I'm not mistaken the choice of either will result in the desired
effect: expansion of the obsurity into clarity. As I age I am really not
that hip to RSS, P3P, CC/PP, or even DOM, RDF, and XSLT! I realize that
most anyone interested in these areas might not need this elucidation but
when it matters, it's almost a priority 1 kind of thing. It's not always
even possible to find out all the possible meanings of a 3-cap set, *all*
of which incidentally are registered trade or service marks at least in CA.
Al's further points relating to internatiolization stuff should move into
our top level of things to examine because we are so UScentric that it's
become a cyberuglyAmerican thing. If we can begin to have attention put
onto places where we're blatantly doing this, it might help us all a lot. I
will never forget when a floor questioner at a WWWx plenary session asked a
presenter from Japan who was talking about regional language availabilities
"why don't they all just learn English?" And I don't think he was being
self-deprecatingly ironic. Just the "directional assumptions" make us seem
hopelessly chauvinistic since the percentage of literate people on the
planet who think reading is "intuitively" from left to right might very
well be in the minority!
--
Love.
ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE
Received on Saturday, 18 November 2000 10:20:08 UTC