W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > spec-prod@w3.org > January to March 2005

Re: Square-bracket output of Definition in specs is bogus

From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 09:25:46 -0500
Message-Id: <00a938df96800eb77b4937aece3e5aff@w3.org>
To: spec-prod@w3.org

Le 11 févr. 2005, à 14:08, Norman Walsh a écrit :
> If we were required to have glossaries, I'd be inclined to remove any
> attempt to define the term inline and simply link it to the glossary
> where the definition would occur.

I have read the Oxford Style Manual yesterday in a bookshop by 
curiosity. They say define inline the terms and put a glossary at the 
end of the document. The glossary being a fast way to access the 
definition of terms. Because you define only once the term inline and 
after 30 pages reading, you might need again the precise definition, 
then you go to the glossary.

Glossaries are also used out of context of the specification.

> Writing a definition so that it fits into the flow of the text and
> stands alone in the glossary (so that one can be made automatically
> From the other) is very, very hard.

:))) which means that the inline definition might lead to ambiguity. :) 
because IMHO it should stand alone, because it's a definition. (but 
maybe it's my scientific background which does that ;) )

Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager
*** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Saturday, 12 February 2005 14:25:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:55:12 UTC