Re: [docbook] DocBook Technical Committee Meeting Minutes: 15December 2010

[Dave Pawson <davep@dpawson.co.uk>]

On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 09:36:28 -0800
"Bob Stayton" <bobs@sagehill.net> wrote:

>       3107140  aconym expansion inline 
> 
> Members felt there are already mechanisms to support 
> acronyms. 
> 
> ACTION: Norm to respond to RFE.


He did
"We talked about this on the call today. It seems that there are two
existing approaches that would work. First, you could put the acronyms
in a glossary, point to the glossary entries, and get the expansions
from there. If you wanted a one-off entry without all the glossary
machinery, you could use alt for this purpose.

If neither of those approaches satisfies your use case, could you
provide a little more detail for us?"



I've not argued that the acronym expansion could be in the glossary.
My complaint is that I can't expand it inline.
  I've no idea about the Chicago manual of style, but in English I
was always told to expand an acroym inline, on first use, thereafter
using the abbreviated form. E.g laser (light amplification by
stimulated emission of radiation), .... laser is ....

As with sighted people, a blind user shouldn't have to hike over to the
glossary to get that expansion if the author wants to use good English
practices.

Is that sufficient Norm?






-- 

regards 

-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk