Re: REF 3.1 TAKE 2 - Add specificity to required checkpoint.

Hi,

Are we going to create a similar list for the abbreviations and acronyms 
that would not need expanding?

thanks,
-Kerstin

Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:

> It has come to my attention that my note is ambiguous.  I have changed 
> it therefore to fix the impression that foreign words are not allowed. 
>  It was meant to say that they must be marked if they are not in the 
> dictionary.
>
>
>    REF - 3.1     Add specificity to required checkpoint.
>
>  
>
>  
>
> Suggest that we add the following to the end of the first success 
> criteria. 
>
>  
>
> "Foreign words or phrases that are found in standard unabridged 
> dictionaries for the natural language of the content do not need to be 
> marked.  (For a list of common examples of exceptions for different 
> languages, see the W3C-WAI foreign word exception examples listing at 
> [insert URL].)"
>
>  
>
> Note: these lists do not currently exist - but could be easily 
> generated as examples so people would know what we mean.
>