W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > July to September 2001

Re: Including content modes in 4.1

From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn@reef.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 20:16:37 -0700
Message-Id: <a05100312b78d24682025@[]>
To: Joe Clark <joeclark@contenu.nu>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
At 1:49 PM -0400 2001/7/31, Joe Clark wrote:
>By the way, it is unwise to continue to refer to human languages as 
>"natural" languages, no matter how well-understood that term is 
>among the cognoscenti. Why not call them human languages?

Well, if you want to get picky, HTML and XML and SMIL and C++ and
Perl and Visual Basic and Applesoft BASIC are all human languages

As long as "natural language" is defined somewhere in a glossary, I
think that our use of the term makes sense, as that is the technical
term used by people in the field (e.g. NPL professionals), and the
other folks who aren't familiar with this term really should learn it.
Otherwise our document won't be taken seriously by the people working
with natural/human languages.


Does this argument seem eerily familiar to anyone else?


Kynn Bartlett <kynn@reef.com>
Technical Developer Liaison
Reef North America
Accessibility - W3C - Integrator Network
Tel +1 949-567-7006
Received on Tuesday, 31 July 2001 23:23:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:38 UTC