W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > November 2011

Re: Reasonable definitions

From: Michael Witten <mfwitten@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 18:45:25 -0000
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <8a09a299949c425ea3f859f5caef742a-mfwitten@gmail.com>
On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 10:13:34 -0800, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 7:22 AM, Michael Witten <mfwitten@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The CSS 2.1 specification uses some very confusing (if not erroneous)
>> terminology in describing the fundamental concepts of the Box Model:
>>
>>  http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/REC-CSS2-20110607/box.html#box-dimensions
> [snip]
>> The uses of the words `perimeter', `edge', `width', and `box' are
>> completely unreasonable unless the following statements are
>> considered reasonable:
>>
>>    * The `perimeter' of an area really means the `outer perimeter'
>>      of an area.
>>
>>      The word `edge' is a suitable synonym for the word `perimeter'.
>
> Yes, this seems reasonable.  The spec says exactly that.

So, it would be reasonable if the spec were to define `orange'
as a suitable synonym for `perimeter'?---just because that's
what the spec says.

Reasonable definitions are usually chosen so as to avoid clashes with
existing usage, especially when the proposed synonyms already have
some kind of relationship to each other in common language.
Received on Tuesday, 15 November 2011 19:27:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:46 GMT