W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > October to December 2001

RE: Abbreviations

From: Suzanne M. Topping <stopping@bizwonk.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 15:45:33 -0500
Message-ID: <427F53DA8F48E9498ADF0F868763F88C028BC7@wonkserver1.bizwonk.com>
To: <www-international@w3.org>

-----Original Message-----
From: David_Possin@i2.com [mailto:David_Possin@i2.com]

>WC means restroom in Germany, too, 00 (2 zeros, pronounced Null-Null) 
>is also commonly used. 

I've seen it used in varioius places in Europe, (Italy, Greece, Israel,
maybe Turkey, can't remember) so it's best to avoid if possible.

Not sure if AWC would necessarily have the same connotation though...
The addition of the A might deflect the association.

>I would leave the abbreviations in the resource bundles and 
>add their precise meaning as a comment so that localizers 
>can figure out what to do with them. 

From an internationalization viewpoint, this would be a best practice.
Granted, they could get accidentally translated, but that potential is
probably easier to deal with than having to change the structure later
in the event that localized product names are eventually implemented.

Gladys originally asked:

>* If this abbreviations or product names are not translated, 
>should I take them out of the resource bundle and hard code 
>them? Or should I leave them in the resource bundle? The 
>likelihood of translating these names in the near future 
>is very low, probably lower than the likelihood of 
>translators translating them by mistake. 
 
Not sure what countries you are going into, but perhaps it would be a
comfort to remember that the tendency in a variety of languages is to
leave product names in English anyway. So while you may view it as a
problem to have an English name and abbreviation, the end impact may not
be that horrendous, depending on where you are going.
Received on Thursday, 15 November 2001 15:45:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 19:16:58 GMT