- From: Andrew Sidwell <takkaria@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:13:56 +0000
- To: Colin Lieberman <colin@cactusflower.org>
- CC: public-html@w3.org
Colin Lieberman wrote: > > I know some folks oppose the xhtml 2 plan to get rid of <acronym>, but > are two tags really necessary? > > I think more useful would be an attribute to <abbr> that indicates to > user agents whether the abbreviation is meant to be spoken as initials > or as a word. There could be an additional optional attribute for some > other pronunciation: What is the advantage of getting rid of <acronym> and replacing it with an attribute on another element, especially when most people don't know the difference between abbreviations and acronyms anyway? I don't really have an opinion either way when it comes to keeping vs. removing <acronym>, but I think adding extra attributes muddies the semantic waters a little. > <abbr title="World Wide Web Consortium" type="initial">W3C</abbr> > > <abbr title="Completely Automated Public Turing Test to Tell Computers > and Humans Apart" type="word">CAPCHA</abbr> > > <abbr title="Structured Query Language" type="custom" > pronounce="sequel">SQL</abbr> I object to a "pronounce" attribute, on the grounds that I say "SQL" as initials. :) To make the point more general -- whilst such an attribute might be useful for screenreaders to some extent, different people say things different ways. If one website uses "sequel" and one uses "ess cue ell", I think that would be confusing. Andrew Sidwell
Received on Friday, 16 March 2007 08:37:32 UTC