Print

Print


I think <orig> and <reg>, definitely, rather than <app> and <rdg>, but shouldn’t it rather be:

 

<choice>

  <orig>s/he</orig>

  <reg>he or she</reg>

</choice>?

 

(“He or she” sounds more natural, to my ear, than “she or he”, and Mr Google seems to confirm that I am not alone in this, although many of the first hits were discussions of whether one should be allowed to use such a formulation.)

 

One could, of course, argue that “s/he” is an abbreviation (for “he or she”, or, if you insist, “she or he”) and use <abbr> and <expan>. This applies equally, if less obviously, to the others, too, I should have thought.

 

Matthew


Fra: John Carlson [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sendt: 10 January 2008 02:49
Til: [log in to unmask]
Emne: Re: s/he media/tion car(s)

 

What about this:

<choice>
  <orig>s/he</orig>
  <choice>
    <reg>she</reg>
    <reg>he</reg>
  </choice>
</choice>

- John

On 1/9/08, Arthit Suriyawongkul <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

just curious,
what are your ideas on marking these words in a way that
maintain all their possible reads ?

* s/he    [she or he]
* media/tion media(tion) media-tion  [media and mediation]
* car(s)   [car or cars]

for examples/contexts, try:
http://www.google.com/search?q=media%2Ftion


(i don't know how to call this kind of phenomena .. overlapping text ?)

cheers,
Art