W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > October to December 2000

Re: Question on abbreviations (fwd)

From: Anne Pemberton <apembert@crosslink.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 17:49:16 -0800
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.20001229174916.007d6e60@apembert.pop.crosslink.net>
To: "Web Content Accessibility Guidelines" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Matt,

	Looking at your various responses on this topic, I sense you have a strong
protective sense towards database managers. You are concerned that database
managers would have to clean up existing databases and it would be onerous.
You don't seem concerned that users are in a lesser position than the
creator of the content to understand an acronym. If the content provider
doesn't know the correct use of an acronym in his database, whatever reason
is it there? If the database content isn't understandable to the user, why
would he/she want to use it anyway? Badly designed data/databases are just
that, and they really don't deserve a defense! 

	I'm unsure why you are critical of a plan to change such content only
forward and not backward. Let's do it right from now on, even tho we have
to live with the old mess until you database managers get around to fixing
it correctly. 
But mostly let's get started with doing it right.

	You ask why abbreviations and acronyms need to be tagged? It's because
they are not or not yet "natural words". If/when the technology has the
ability to translate "on the fly" to other natural languages, non-words
will have to be tagged ... so we have one reason for now (expanding stuff),
and one reason for later (language translations), so get started now since
it's so onerous to get it done right! <grin>



	

Anne L. Pemberton
http://www.pen.k12.va.us/Pav/Academy1
http://www.erols.com/stevepem/Homeschooling
apembert@crosslink.net
Enabling Support Foundation
http://www.enabling.org
Received on Friday, 29 December 2000 17:58:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:08 GMT