- From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
- Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 02:38:17 +0100
- To: <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>
I suggest that EARL should not stand for anything at all, and when quizzed, we should just refer people to some of the core discussions on ERT about what it should be called. It's perfectly acceptable to have an acronym that has no particular expansion. In fact, in the case of EARL, every time we've tried to expand it, we've ended up not being able to fully capture what we mean. The characters "EARL" should be enough to symbolize to anyone who has worked on the language enough to recognize the whole "feeling" behind the name, and, to people being introduced to the language, they won't have some redundant first impression of a language that may need at least a thousand words to explain. In other words, "EARL" should become a word (acronym) of its very own. There are only a few instances of the expansion on the EARL homepage anyway - these would be quite easy to remove, and perhaps replace with a link to this note, or some XHTML equivalent. -- Kindest Regards, Sean B. Palmer @prefix : <http://webns.net/roughterms/> . :Sean :hasHomepage <http://purl.org/net/sbp/> .
Received on Monday, 21 May 2001 21:35:55 UTC