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
definition.

~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 15 November 2011 20:34:08 GMT

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