- From: John M Slatin <john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu>
- Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 12:48:16 -0500
- To: <gez.lemon@gmail.com>, <Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com>
- Cc: "WCAG" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, <w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org>
Gez wrote: <blockquote> I think the definitions should accurately reflect the generally accepted meaning of the words, with the guide document illustrating (or linking to) advisory techniques, such as writing out in full any abbreviations in the main content the first time they're used, and marking up subsequent abbreviations using the appropriate element. Other techniques might suggest providing a glossary of abbreviations, or glossary of terms that include abbreviations used in the content. I definitely think the problem should be moved to techniques, rather than redefining words. </blockquote> Gez, there's been no *intent* to redefine words or define them incorrectly! Frankly, I had never heard the term "initialism" before, but now you and Christophe have both brought it to our attention. I've now looked up both "acronym" and "initialism" in three dictionaries (Merriam-Webster, Compact Oxford English Dictionary, and American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language). They're not completely consistent (I've pasted in the definitions below), and it seems to me that the definitions Becky proposed do actually fall within generally accepted usage, at least in the US. However, I would have no difficulty including the term "initialism" in the tdefinition and/or the success criterion if doing so would clarify the scope of the success criterion. I think The 30 June 2005 draft of the Guide to WCAG 2.0 Guideline 3.1 Level 3 Success Criterion 3 lists the techniques you're suggesting above. The draft Guide document is available at http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-WCAG20-GENERAL-20050630/meaning-located.htm l A little bit of history for others who may be wondering why we're spending so much time on this issue. - WCAG 1.0 includes a checkpoint (4.2, Priority 3) which requires that acronyms are expanded. - The current Working Draft of WCAG 2.0 (30 June 2005) includes a success criterion (Guideline 3.1 Level 3 Success Criterion 3) requiring that "A mechanism for finding the expanded form of acronyms and abbreviations is available." In short, the word "acronym" appears in normative content so it's probably a good idea to define it. For what it's worth, Merriam-Webster appears to treat one sense of "acronym" as synonymous with both "abbreviation" and "initialism". Here is their definition of "acronym": <blockquote cite="http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=acronym&x =0&y=0"> : a word (as NATO, radar, or snafu) formed from the initial letter or letters of each of the successive parts or major parts of a compound term; also : an abbreviation (as FBI) formed from initial letters : INITIALISM </blockquote> Merriam-Webster also defines "initialism" as a kind of acronym: <blockquote cite="http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=initialis m"> Function: noun : an acronym formed from initial letters </blockquote> The Compact Oxford English Dictionary's definition of "acronym" does not list "initialism" as a synonym for "acronym": <blockquote cite="http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/acronym?view=uk"> * noun a word formed from the initial letters of other words (e.g. laser, Aids). - ORIGIN from Greek akron 'end, tip' + onoma 'name'. </blockquote> The Compact Oxford English Dictionary defines "initialism" as follows: <blockquote cite="http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/initialism?view=uk"> * noun an abbreviation consisting of initial letters pronounced separately (e.g. BBC). </blockquote> And here's how the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language defines "acronym": <blockquote cite="http://www.bartleby.com/cgi-bin/texis/webinator/sitesearch?FILTER= col61&query=acronym"> A word formed from the initial letters of a name, such as WAC for Women's Army Corps, or by combining initial letters or parts of a series of words, such as radar... </blockquote> And this is the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language definition of "initialism": <blockquote cite="http://www.bartleby.com/61/48/I0144850.html"> NOUN: An abbreviation consisting of the first letter or letters of words in a phrase (for example, IRS for Internal Revenue Service), syllables or components of a word (TNT for trinitrotoluene), or a combination of words and syllables (ESP for extrasensory perception) and pronounced by spelling out the letters one by one rather than as a solid word. </blockquote> Hope this is helpful. John Dr. John M. Slatin, Director Accessibility Institute University of Texas at Austin FAC 248C 1 University Station G9600 Austin, TX 78712 ph 512-495-4288, fax 512-495-4524 email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu Web http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility -----Original Message----- From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Gez Lemon Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2005 4:13 PM To: Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com Cc: WCAG; w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org Subject: Re: proposed new definitions for abbreviation and acronym Hi Becky On 15/09/05, Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com <Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com> wrote: <bockquote> In my search I found several online references that did not require that acronyms be pronounceable (maybe all of them use Webster's as a source, I didn't dig that deep). I actually prefer the more restrictive definition but the rest of team B did not necessarily agree with me :). And while I didn't want to explicitly call it out, IE support is an issue, by using the less restrictive definition of acronym authors can still mark acronyms up using IE until it gets fixed. I did think about adding a definition for initialisms but that term is not used with WCAG so I didn't want to introduce it. I agree that all acronyms are abbreviations and future proposals for GL 3.1 will suggest deprecating the HTML acronym technique in favor of just abbreviation (another proposal that I suspect will be controversial). Can you suggest an alternative definition? </blockquote> I think the definitions should accurately reflect the generally accepted meaning of the words, with the guide document illustrating (or linking to) advisory techniques, such as writing out in full any abbreviations in the main content the first time they're used, and marking up subsequent abbreviations using the appropriate element. Other techniques might suggest providing a glossary of abbreviations, or glossary of terms that include abbreviations used in the content. I definitely think the problem should be moved to techniques, rather than redefining words. Best regards, Gez -- _____________________________ Supplement your vitamins http://juicystudio.com
Received on Friday, 16 September 2005 17:48:28 UTC