- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 06:59:38 +0000 (UTC)
On Wed, 14 May 2008, Mike Wilson wrote:
>
> Yes, I assumed the same thing. I think it would be better to not use
> such an overloaded term for the stated purpose.
I agree in principle, but the alternatives, e.g.:
> so my first recommendation would be to go for <conversation> and live
> with its length.
>
> Many other element names are abbreviated so could also opt for
> that:
> <convers>
> <spkdlg> ("spoken dialog")
...are all worse (far too long in the case of the first suggestion above,
and inconsistent with the style of the rest of the language for the other
two). Some words have multiple meanings, and when we introduce elements
that use those words it can initially be confusing, but I'm sure than ten
years from now people will by and large not have a problem with it, just
like by and large people don't have a problem with <script> or <map>
these days. And, to put this in perspective, we have far worse names in
the language already, like <address>. Not that that is a good defence. :-)
--
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 13 May 2008 23:59:38 UTC