- From: Anne Pemberton <apembert@crosslink.net>
- Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 17:49:16 -0800
- To: "Web Content Accessibility Guidelines" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Matt, Looking at your various responses on this topic, I sense you have a strong protective sense towards database managers. You are concerned that database managers would have to clean up existing databases and it would be onerous. You don't seem concerned that users are in a lesser position than the creator of the content to understand an acronym. If the content provider doesn't know the correct use of an acronym in his database, whatever reason is it there? If the database content isn't understandable to the user, why would he/she want to use it anyway? Badly designed data/databases are just that, and they really don't deserve a defense! I'm unsure why you are critical of a plan to change such content only forward and not backward. Let's do it right from now on, even tho we have to live with the old mess until you database managers get around to fixing it correctly. But mostly let's get started with doing it right. You ask why abbreviations and acronyms need to be tagged? It's because they are not or not yet "natural words". If/when the technology has the ability to translate "on the fly" to other natural languages, non-words will have to be tagged ... so we have one reason for now (expanding stuff), and one reason for later (language translations), so get started now since it's so onerous to get it done right! <grin> Anne L. Pemberton http://www.pen.k12.va.us/Pav/Academy1 http://www.erols.com/stevepem/Homeschooling apembert@crosslink.net Enabling Support Foundation http://www.enabling.org
Received on Friday, 29 December 2000 17:58:41 UTC