Re: ISSUE-636 ACTION-1398 Provide spec. text for aria-roledescription

I sort of like the idea of aliasing for ease of authoring.  On the other
hand, permitting illegal junk in markup is why the web is so screwed up.


On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 11:34 AM, Charles McCathie Nevile <
chaals@yandex-team.ru> wrote:

> On Thu, 03 Apr 2014 23:51:30 +0200, James Craig <jcraig@apple.com> wrote:
>
>  On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:09 PM, Joseph Scheuhammer <clown@alum.mit.edu>
>>
>
>  The suggested spec text includes (my emphasis) " ...Provides a human
>>> readable, *localized* string name for the role of the element."  I'm not
>>> entirely sure what W3C English spelling policy is -- American only,
>>> Commonwealth only, or a mixture.
>>>
>>
>> I think it's fine to have the term used in prose with either spelling...
>> Editor's choice if the W3C style guide does not specify.
>>
>
> W3C policy for prose is to use US English in all its official text.
>
>
>  To avoid that issue, use l7d.  Then again, maybe the official policy is
>>> that kind of acronym is not allowed either.
>>>
>>
>> In spec prose, either spelling is preferable to the abbreviation for the
>> sake of clarity.
>>
>> In an attribute name or value token, my opinion is that neither spelling
>> nor the abbreviation is acceptable due to web author confusion with
>> spelling or clarity of meaning.
>>
>
> Agreed.
>
> Explaining to developers who have know a limited amount of english which
> spelling variant they have to use is a recipe for mistakes. Either alias
> the two variants, or choose something easier to get right.
>
> cheers
>
> Chaals
>
> --
> Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex
>         chaals@yandex-team.ru         Find more at http://yandex.com
>
>