W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2000


From: Ann Navarro <ann@webgeek.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2000 15:26:50 -0500
Message-Id: <4.1.20000220152454.03ae6ee0@mail.webgeek.com>
To: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-hwg@idyllmtn.com>, "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <unagi69@concentric.net>
Cc: WAI Interest Group Emailing List <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
At 07:47 PM 2/19/00 -0800, Kynn Bartlett wrote:

>In real world usage, an ACRONYM would be considered a specific
>type of ABBReviation.  I -believe- that the reason we have both
>is that they are both ways of conveying the semantic meaning "this
>is an abbreviated form of something," but ACRONYM has the additional
>-presentational- meaning of "...and pronounce this text as a word,
>not as a string of letters."
>That's how I think they should be used -- and thus I think you're
>wrong in saying HWG, W3C, or HTML should be marked up with ACRONYM.

Hmmm.   Would it be detrimental to encourage treatment of either as acronym
since some user agents apparently support acronyms where abbr is less
supported? How do the alternative devices/browsers deal with it? (I don't
have access to pwWebSpeak here today to test, though I'd be interested in
other platforms as well). 

Received on Sunday, 20 February 2000 15:27:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:07 UTC