W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2001

ABBR vs ACRONYM, round 57894174803 [a tirade]

From: Bailey, Bruce <Bruce_Bailey@ed.gov>
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 08:51:40 -0500
Message-ID: <5DCA49BDD2B0D41186CE00508B6BEBD0300575@wdcrobexc01.ed.gov>
To: "'Charles F. Munat'" <chas@munat.com>
Cc: "'Interest Group'" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Dear Charles,

I appreciate your "rant" and the follow-ups.  I am much relieved that what I
took from the last time this came up was not misplaced.

IMHO the distinction between acronym and abbr as pronounceable or not is
much more functional than the alternatives (e.g.: "initialism" /
other-shorten-form, multiple/single word, no-punctuation/uses-period) which
-- even if used consistently -- aren't really helpful or meaningful.  As it
has been pointed out, the examples in the specs don't follow the defined
rule, so clearly they are broken.

Kynn's advice (regard acronym as deprecated) is eminently practical.

However, I find your call to advocate for fixing the spec and not abandoning
what could be a very useful tab I find much more appealing.  Thank you.
Education and awareness is really what the WAI and the WCAG are about, and
better use of the acronym tag is one small piece of that.

If nothing else, I learned that "chaz" is NOT your nickname!  I had no idea
Charles could be abbreviate (except to "Charlie" of course).


From: "Charles F. Munat" <chas@munat.com>
To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 18:02:24 -0800
Message-ID: <003c01c08fe0$d9a417b0$0100a8c0@aries>
Subject: RE: ABBR vs ACRONYM, round 57894174803 [a tirade]


We can live without acronym, but why should we? Why kill off a very useful
word by making it synonymous with abbreviation? Since much of
"accessibility" is really about communication, we should all be advocating
*more* precision in language, not less.

The above are facts, though some would pretend they are opinions. Here is
another fact: The HTML/XHTML recommendations are wrong about acronyms. Here
is an opinion: I think that we should fix them instead of acquiescing and
dropping the useful element "acronym." That browsers don't currently support
them is *no* reason at all to avoid acronym. Do what is right, regardless of
whether others recognize it as right. This is called "leadership," and it's
what the W3C (and all of us) *should* be doing.

Received on Wednesday, 7 February 2001 08:52:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:36:00 UTC