- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 09:07:49 +0000 (UTC)
On Fri, 16 Mar 2007, Robert Brodrecht wrote: > > Something that is bugging me over on the W3C HTMLWG mailing list is the > want to drop <acronym> in favor of <abbr>. I'm emotionally attached to > <acronym>. I use it a lot, and really do feel like it is semantically > different from <abbr>. Asbj?rn Ulsberg suggest replacing both with > <short>. [1] If it helps you deal with the way the spec is written, you could pretend that <acronym> and <abbr> were both merged into one element <short>, and that that element was later renamed <abbr>... > The idea was a relief because it made the tag MUCH more generic and (now > that I think about it) could have more accurate and broader references > (e.g. microformats use <abbr> for shorter date format, but <short> would > make more sense). We have <time> for that now. (The rest of the e-mail will be handled along with other <object> feedback.) Cheers, -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 12 December 2007 01:07:49 UTC