[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [docbook-tc] Acronym Expansion (was RE: [docbook-tc] DocBook Technical Committee Meeting Minutes: 15 December 2010)
I think this approach is fine. It should also meet most, if not all, localization needs; some languages require the accronym to come first: <para>We use modulated <termdef><acronym>LASER</acronym> (Light Amplification through Stimulated Emission of Radiation)</termdef> technology for short-haul data links.</para> I assume from reading Larry's email our info model allows this. Some languages have more complex requirements, which are probably best handled without additional markup. For the vast majority of languages, I believe the markup I used above will suffice. Cheers, Gershon -----Original Message----- From: Rowland, Larry [mailto:larry.rowland@hp.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 10:32 PM To: Dave Pawson; Bob Stayton Cc: DocBook Technical Committee; docbook@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [docbook-tc] Acronym Expansion (was RE: [docbook-tc] DocBook Technical Committee Meeting Minutes: 15 December 2010) This came up again in today's meeting. There appear to be a couple of issues that are compounding this discussion. The W3C says to use the title attribute for the expansion of acronym and abbr elements. Using the glossary to store information that the transforms would use to add a title attribute when acronym and abbrev elements are rendered would be straightforward but would require changes to the stylesheets. However, apparently many screen readers ignore the W3C recommendations and do nothing with the title attribute. While the title attribute can be helpful to sighted readers in HTML browsers, producing equivalent behavior in PDF may or may not be possible and would be of no use in print. So, is there an alternative available that works in screen readers and all other delivery formats and that does not require additional markup or changes to existing content models. A suggestion was made during today's meeting that is worth considering. I was taught (we won't go into how many years ago) to introduce the term before the abbreviation or acronym. Based on that, this coding will work in DocBook 5 (and 4): <para>We use modulated <termdef>Light Amplification through Stimulated Emission of Radiation (<acronym>LASER</acronym>)</termdef> technology for short-haul data links.</para> If you prefer the acronym first, it still works. You can also move the acronym outside the termdef, but this keeps them together. This solution requires no changes to stylesheets or improvements in screen reader technology. Regards, Larry Rowland -----Original Message----- From: Dave Pawson [mailto:dave.pawson@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 12:51 PM To: Bob Stayton Cc: DocBook Technical Committee; docbook@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [docbook-tc] DocBook Technical Committee Meeting Minutes: 15 December 2010 Not sure what access I've got so responding to all adss It bounced from my own email. On 16 December 2010 17:36, Bob Stayton <bobs@sagehill.net> wrote: > DocBook Technical Committee Meeting Minutes: 15 December 2010 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? regarsd -- Dave Pawson XSLT XSL-FO FAQ. Docbook FAQ. http://www.dpawson.co.uk --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]