- From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
- Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 20:23:40 -0000
- To: "Bailey, Bruce" <Bruce_Bailey@ed.gov>, "Kynn Bartlett" <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
- Cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
> 4. It's probably better to use ABBR and pretend as if ACRONYM > were deprecated since ABBR is general purpose and since > ACRONYM doesn't do what most people think it _should_ do. Are there actually any practical (e.g. acessibility) reasons for using <abbr> instead of <acronym>? As long as people can understand what the phrase has been shortened from, they can probably work out for themselves if it is an abbreviation or an acronym. Maybe using <span> would be better. Am I joking, or what? Well, XHTML has a certain amount of semantics attached to the elements... although a lot have been transfered over to CSS. However, I think it is useful if some of the semantics were to remain with the elements. Note that I am using the term "semantics" to include all meaning: presentational as well. Anyway, I don't think this is one of the most important XHTML topics, only a very small part of one of the more larger debates (that of presentation vs. content, which I'm not going to argue right now). -- Kindest Regards, Sean B. Palmer @prefix : <http://webns.net/roughterms/> . [ :name "Sean B. Palmer" ] :hasHomepage <http://infomesh.net/sbp/> .
Received on Monday, 5 February 2001 15:31:17 UTC