- From: Rob <wlkngowl@unix.asb.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 01:22:08 -0500
- To: Jordan Reiter <jreiter@mail.slc.edu>
- CC: www-html@w3.org
On 22 Aug 97, Jordan Reiter wrote: > I personally think that a great deal of the arguments concerning ABBREV and > ACRONYM seemed to be arguments for argumentation's sake. I don't see why > these elements, which may be useful but will not be very widely used, have > to be mulled over so viciously. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ "Viciously"? The arguments over them are warranted because (1) The only cover a subset of related terms (acronym excludes abbreviations, call letters, etc.) There's also a desire to note special terms like proper names of people and places. (2) There are some inconsistencies in the definition, or perceived ones, that lead to some of the bickering/arguing. (3) It's assumed some form of dictionary will clean up the loose ends, yet there is no dictionary type defined. But enough about that (a separate thread): so how closed *is* the draft? Rob --- Robert Rothenburg Walking-Owl (wlkngowl@unix.asb.com) (Se habla PGP.) http://www.wusb.org/mutant/
Received on Friday, 22 August 1997 01:24:36 UTC