Re: REF 3.2 Change "unambiguously" to "first listing".

At 01:53 PM 2003-07-10, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
>
>REF  3.2  Change "unambiguously" to "first listing".
>
>
>We currently state that acronyms and abbreviations must appear 
>unambiguously in unabridged dictionaries.  Unabridged dictionaries can 
>have so many different words and phrases that I m not sure that 
>unambiguously is sufficient.  It may be too tough a test.
>
>
>I suggest instead that we simply say that if it is not the first item in 
>standard unabridged dictionaries for the language, then it should be 
>expanded.  That would change the first (and only) checkpoint to read:
>
>
>
>Acronyms and abbreviations do not appear first in standard unabridged 
>dictionaries for the language or define the first time the first time they 
>appear or are available in a glossary on the site.

"On the site" is risky.  Identifying "the site" is not always obvious, nor
are people rushing to implement RSS site summaries.  But this is one way
that a glossary might be associated with a document.

A more common approach will be that for meanings that are not the dominant
meaning in general use, the document will cite a domain-specific or otherwise
special lexicon.  See VoiceXML 2.0 and the current SSML draft for examples
of this practice.

Example:

  http://www.w3.org/TR/speech-grammar/#S4.10

On the other hand, I think that the clarification of "predominant and well-
documented expansion" from "exists in unabridged dictionaries" to "recognized
in [possibly unabridged] dictionaries as the predominant expansion" is a
justDoIt.  Defaulting should not be allowed to minority expansions in the
presence of more commonly-intended expansions for the same spelling.

We should have some cross-group work on lexicons, dictionaries, and how
web pages link to them.  We in PF have been discussing this with i18n and
Voice Browser and you have been working on it too.  We need to put our
threads together [more on CG].

Al

Received on Monday, 14 July 2003 21:21:33 UTC