RE: [TECHS] Rough draft of technique and test for use of abbr element

> 
> Yvette wrote:
> I think the middle sentence implies that there is some causal 
> relationship between the occurrence of the named anchor and 
> the use of the abbr element directly after it. Wouldn't it be 
> clearer to leave the named anchor out so the example isn't 
> more complex than necessary?
> 

To which Becky replied:

> I was trying to address the issue of entering a document in 
> the middle via a link and still getting the benefit of the 
> abbreviation expansion. This is my alternative to requiring 
> use of the <abbr> and <acronym> elements on every occurrence. 
> Perhaps this needs a more detailed explanation or should I 
> just leave it out and require that only the first occurrence 
> in the delivery unit be marked?
> 

Hi Becky, 

I see what you're getting at now. I remember we had a discussion during the
last call about marking up all acronyms and abbreviations, not just the
first ones. If I remember correctly (can't find the minutes), the outcome of
that conversation was that if the first occurrence of an acronym or
abbreviation is marked up with the expansion, then the user can use a search
feature of the user agent to locate the meaning. So all the author would be
required to do for conformance is mark up the first occurrence. 

What we could do is have just 1 HTML technique that simply explains how to
mark up an abbreviation (without the added complexity of the anchor). In
addition, we could have 2 general techniques. One would be about marking up
the first occurrence, and the other one would be to mark up all occurrences.
We could then explain that either technique is sufficient to comply but the
second method is preferred because it takes less effort for the user to find
the meaning.

Yvette Hoitink
Heritas, Enschede, the Netherlands
E-mail: y.p.hoitink@heritas.nl
WWW: http://www.heritas.nl

Received on Tuesday, 13 September 2005 19:59:27 UTC