[html4all] ACRONYM and ABBR

[Leif Halvard Silli]

Robert J Burns 24-04-08 12:25:   ­  
> On Apr 24, 2008, at 7:08 AM, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
>   
> > when I tested VoiceOver and Fire Vox, [...] NATO was read
> > Enn,Ay,Tee,Oh. [...]
>
> Something like NATO should be pronounced by AT as "Nay - tow" whether  
> or not it is marked up with ABBR of ACRONYM.

Both VoiceOver and Fire Vox reads NATO roughly the same way, regardless 
of whether it is marked up as ABBR or not,

>  Pronunciations like that  
> should be drawn from a pronunciation dictionary for the product (in  
> the same way word processors have spelling dictionaries).

Seems like Fire Vox and VoiceOver have such a dictionary.

>  ABBR should  
> be reserved for either abbreviations not widely used or newly coined  
> abbreviations.

That rule only seems meaningful if the sole purpose of the ABBR is to 
tell how it should be pronounced or be expanded.

>  In such cases more information than simply pronouncing  
> it as a word is needed (is "Nah - two" or "Nat - oh" or "Nay - toe",  
> etc.). The wiki proposal I drafted with the cooperation of others  
> provides the needed hooks for that[1]
>   

 Could be useful.


> >> Which leads me to assume that acronyms are not read as acronyms 
> >> anyhow, and thus AT users are happy with acronyms being marked up
> >> as ABBR. Right?
> >
> > I think so. It is mostly nerds who get in a flap about such things.
> >
>
> Agreed, which is why I don't think we need to continue having separate  
> elements.
>   

I don't feel I need to say anything negative about nerds to agree to 
this. Thus I agree.
-- 
leif halvard silli