Re: RE numbering proposal

On Tuesday, March 18, 2003, at 04:41  PM, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
> Oh AND, someone pointed out that if we use that numbering scheme - 
> that it
> doesn't translate to other languages.

I said that.

> But if we use
> 1-2-1-4
> it says nothing.  No clue as to what it means or belongs to......
> hmmmmmm.

I think M, S, and T are needless redefinitions. Nobody outside of this 
list will know or care what they mean. A, AA, and AAA are at least 

If it's a matter of screen-reader capability, then I suggest the terms 
spelled out: "A", "double A" and "triple A". Or something else that's 
sequential, like A, B, and C.


Received on Tuesday, 18 March 2003 21:04:34 UTC