- From: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>
- Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 07:15:28 -0400
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
+1 to fantasai that head/foot have both absolute and relative meanings, and are good words to use for logical direction. I don't have clear preference between before/after and head/foot, if many English speakers say before/after is confusing, I just assume it must be true. I'm more concerned that our tendency to change names at late stage. It's true that WG has made no commitments and have rights to change anytime, but it's also true that changing name usually involves some costs. I think WG having rights to change doesn't necessarily mean WG can change without considering the cost. In this specific case, cost should be small; some portion of users who used to use before/after, some experimental implementations, some XSL-FO users, etc., but I have no idea how big the benefit is. Is the benefit big enough to overcome the cost? Since these changes give almost no benefits to non-native speakers, I have to rely on native speakers to make the judge. I just wish you guys to consider whether the benefit is big enough compared to the cost. If it was considered and consensus was made to change, I'm more than happy to follow. Regards, Koji
Received on Thursday, 21 June 2012 11:16:03 UTC