- From: Christoph Päper <christoph.paeper@crissov.de>
- Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 03:39:59 +0100
2007-12-13 11:27 Smylers: > why do you believe that distinguishing initialisms-and-acronyms > (both labelled as "acronyms") from abbreviations is actually useful? Abbreviations are usually expanded upon (possibly synthetic) reading aloud, acronyms are not (and neither are contractions like /isn't/ or shortenings like /spec/). Acronyms traditionally are set smaller. Some use small caps, but I believe those are only valid for minuscules, not majuscules. Multi-part abbreviations (e.g. /e. g./) are traditionally set with reduced width of the spaces in between. This can be achieved in two ways, either with   (or similar) or by altering |word-spacing|. That's only the roman script, though. This discussion has been held many times before here and elsewhere. I don't believe there are new arguments to be made.
Received on Thursday, 13 December 2007 18:39:59 UTC