Re: Shorten <object> in XHTML 2.0?

Jens wrote on Monday, June 30, 2003 at 11:43:35 AM:

> In practice it's totally irrelevant if you use <object /> or <obj
> />, <image /> or <img />, <paragraph /> or <p /> (as long as it
> works), but one (and maybe the most important) thing is missing: a
> consequent naming. Why is there <td />, but <object />, why is there
> <p />, but <title /> (please, don't tell me any history or
> background...)?

This should shed some light on the subject:
<http://www.w3.org/People/Bos/DesignGuide/readability.html>

Basically, frequently used elements should have easy to type, short
names. Rarely used elements should have long names that are easy to
determine the meaning of.

HTML/XHTML don't follow this ideal perfectly, but it explains why two
distinct naming conventions exist in the first place.

-- 
John Lewis