W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2012

RE: [css3-text] Better wording than "known to be language X" (was line-break questions/comments

From: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 03:51:35 -0400
To: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
CC: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>, W3C Style <www-style@w3.org>, "public-i18n-cjk@w3.org" <public-i18n-cjk@w3.org>, "ML public-i18n-core (public-i18n-core@w3.org)" <public-i18n-core@w3.org>
Message-ID: <A592E245B36A8949BDB0A302B375FB4E0D5E63C3FD@MAILR001.mail.lan>
I like "identified", although, I have to admit that my English knowledge doesn't give me only vague distinction between "know" and "identify."

There's a sentence in the content language Terminology[1]:
  Note that it is possible for the content language of an element to be unknown.

Should this also be:
  Note that it is possible for the content language of an element could not be identified.
?


[1] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-text/#content-language

-----Original Message-----
From: David Singer [mailto:singer@apple.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2012 1:18 AM
To: Koji Ishii
Cc: Glenn Adams; W3C Style; public-i18n-cjk@w3.org; ML public-i18n-core (public-i18n-core@w3.org)
Subject: Re: [css3-text] Better wording than "known to be language X" (was line-break questions/comments

One problem is the verb 'known' which implies some knowledge on the part of some reader, i.e. the verb identifies an agent outside the scope of the specification.  Perhaps it would be better to use a verb that talks about what the reader is told, rather than what they deduce or conclude?  

"identified as language [x]"
"identified by the rules of the enclosing context as being in language [x]" (a bit wordy) "labeled as language [x]" (though some identification is not via 'labelling')

David Singer
Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Wednesday, 29 August 2012 07:58:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:59 GMT