W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > October to December 2003

RE: Abbreviations and Acronyms: [techs] Latest HTML Techniques Draft

From: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 13:54:19 -0000
To: "'Maurizio Boscarol'" <maurizio@usabile.it>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000001c3c0b7$70eb8fe0$1102000a@w3c40upc3ma3j2>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Maurizio Boscarol [mailto:maurizio@usabile.it] 
> Sent: 12 December 2003 12:29

> >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".

In my mind, a <term> element is too vague.  For example, I think some
people will use such an element to isolate technical terms, or perhaps
new terms in a document. (So that they can style them differently from
the surrounding text.)  (I can think of other uses too.)

What we're talking about here is specifically something that has a
longer form, so that's why I'm happy with an abbr element name (using
the word 'abbreviation' ((where that last word could be another
application for a <term> tag)) in its non-technical sense).

That's not to say that a <term> tag would not be useful.  I'm forever
marking up stuff as <span class="new-term">...</span> or such.
Received on Friday, 12 December 2003 08:56:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:26 GMT