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

Re: The obvious confusion of `edge'

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 12:33:05 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDDAsRPMQLx1B7U+pC7cu=8g4MpULmLOh8HjZ0Kg0_0fPA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Michael Witten <mfwitten@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Michael Witten <mfwitten@gmail.com> wrote:
> To clarify further, it is confusing and unreasonable, because the word
> `edge' is first introduced as a synonym for `perimeter', and now it is
> also being used to refer to part of the perimeter (or, should I say `edge'?)

Both usages of the term are appropriate and normal in English.

>>>    * The phrase `top edge' is equivalent to the phrase `top of the edge'
>>>      (or at least the `edge' in `top edge' has no meaning by itself).
>> No, it refers to the top edge - that is, the top segment of the
>> perimeter.  I think your trouble here is that you're stuck on the fact
>> that the *entire* perimeter of the box is called an "edge", and then
>> that edge is broken up into four sub-edges.  An edge can be made of
>> edges!
> Look at what you've just done.
> You've had to clarify yourself by using `perimeter' and `sub-edge'.
> You essentially admit that terms that the spec uses are completely
> unreasonable and inadequate for expressing yourself precisely.

No, I defined the terms more clearly, in case you were confused by
something.  I can't very well define a term by *using* the term, so I
used different terms that mean the same thing.  That doesn't imply
that the original term should be replaced by the term used in the

Received on Tuesday, 15 November 2011 20:34:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 11 February 2015 12:34:59 UTC