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


From: Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@virgin.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 18:13:36 -0000
To: "WAI Interest Group" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <NDBBKDFLFKGBNPJPGKDFIEPNCAAA.dave.pawson@virgin.net>
Jason said:
This issue has been discussed before. The main conclusion has been that
the difference between abbreviations and acronyms is not particularly
important--both HTML elements will produce the same effect when rendered,
for instance, by a speech-based browser.

I'd go further than that, in support of Charles, say dump one.
Again with Charles, choose acronym and dump abbr.

In effect, both ABBR and ACRONYM identify particular terms as special:
they may be spelled out by speech synthesizers, marked as technical terms
for purposes of spelling checkers and, perhaps, search engines; a TITLE
may be provided, under which circumstances it may be rendered by the
browser instead of the abbreviation/acronym (in speech-based environments
especially), and so on.
And when going to braille, we can correctly idenify terms of this nature.
Let the linguists have their play, keep the markup simple
would be my solution.

Regards, DaveP
Received on Tuesday, 22 February 2000 13:13:48 UTC

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