- From: Susan Lesch <lesch@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 01:05:39 -0700
- To: "Ishida, Richard" <Richard.Ishida@gbr.xerox.com>, "'spec-prod@w3.org'" <spec-prod@w3.org>
- Cc: "'i18n-editor@w3.org'" <i18n-editor@w3.org>
Hello, Richard, > The Manual of Style includes the following example: > > ... as is done for the 'page' property of CSS2 ([CSS2], section 13.3.2). > > The question recently arose, should be parens be used when there is no "... > section 13.3.2"? (They are not used by the Manual of Style). Maybe the introduction to punctuation in the Chicago Manual 5.2 applies: "The tendency to use all the punctuation that the grammatical structure of the material suggests is referred to as close (klos) punctuation. It is a practice that was more common in the past, and though it may be helpful when the writing is elaborate, it can, when misused, produce an uninviting choppiness. There is a tendency today, on the other hand, to punctuate only when necessary to prevent misreading. Most contemporary writers and editors lean toward this open style of punctuation yet preserve a measure of subjectivity and discretion." Is that enough to support your view? I admit to using some extra commas in my life. > Eg. > ... as applications of XML 1.0 [XML]. > > or > > ... as applications of XML 1.0 ([XML]). The first looks preferable. > The above being different from: > > for specifications such as [XML 1.0] and [CSS2]. Here we cut a corner too quickly. What do you think of this instead? for specifications such as XML 1.0 [XML1] and CSS2 [CSS2]. > (I prefer no parens). I agree.
Received on Saturday, 13 October 2001 04:08:01 UTC