- From: Maurizio Boscarol <maurizio@usabile.it>
- Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 13:29:18 +0100
- To: <ishida@w3.org>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
From: "Richard Ishida > A practical note. If we're all struggling so much to decide what is an > acronym vs. abbreviation (vs sigle, vs aposcope,...) what chance do we > have that people in general creating pages will manage to use a > consistent approach. And how much will they care? > I'm for a single concept that indicates "this stands for a longer word > or phrase". So do I. There're a lot of words hard to decide if they're abbreviations or acronym. HTML is an abbreviation or an acronym? Hypertext in italian is a unique word, so the acronym should be HML... And so on. It's no our mission to decide such a linguistic problem. >I'm happy to call that an abbreviation using the less > technical sense of that word. The "term" proposal sounds good for me. I vote for a generic "term" with his explanation. Because this can cause backward compatibility problem, my second vote is for "abbr". Best, Maurizio Boscarol http://www.usabile.it ======================================== http://www.ecologiadeisitiweb.it/ Hops Libri - A book to build usable and accessible web sites (only italian). ========================================
Received on Friday, 12 December 2003 07:09:57 UTC