• From: Eric Bohlman <ebohlman@e...>
• To: Steve Tinney <stinney@s...>,James Robertson <jamesr@s...>, xml-dev@l...
• Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 01:47:55 -0600

1/17/01 1:39:29 AM, Steve Tinney <stinney@s...> wrote:

>As the original author of the insiderism comment to James, I stand by my
>point.  Obfuscation by alpha-numeric abbreviation is *both* convenient
>to insiders *and* a barrier to outsiders.  Proliferation of such
>abbreviations increases the socio-linguistic distance between insiders
>and outsiders.  Such is life.

I have to agree here; the first time I saw a numberism ("i18n") I thought it 
was cute, but as I see more and more of them they start to look like 
expressions of nerdismo ("We're more comfortable with numbers than words and 
we're *proud* of it!") which, at least for me, are a bit offputting and 
conjure up images of 3l33t h4x0r slang ala B1FF.

For people trying to save their wrists, there *are* such things as keyboard 
macros, abbreviation expanders, and search/replace commands...
 

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: How could RDDL be distributed ?
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>

• Prev by Date: RE: How could RDDL be distributed ?
• Next by Date: Re: XML Schemas: Best Practices
• Previous by thread: RE: How could RDDL be distributed ?
• Next by thread: Re: How could RDDL be distributed ?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread