  Disambiguation Re: Verified issues - week of 26 April  From:
Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org> Date: Sun, 2 May 2004
15:00:00 -0400 (EDT) To: Joe Clark <joeclark@joeclark.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.55.0405021329570.4196@homer.w3.org>  (I
think this issue is related to the neccessity of eschewing
sesquipedalianism, by the way)  On Sun, 2 May 2004, Joe Clark
wrote:  >> Issue 700 - Examples of ambiguous contracted words?
>is the *evidence* (as opposed to supposition) that this harms
any disabled  Where there is no ambiguity the above question
obviously doesn't apply. (I believe that your example is a
different case - that of people writing incorrectly - see
below).  I'm not so sure that there is a case to be made about
contractions beyond that for general ambiguity, except to remind
people that many contractions are difficult to undrstand,
although they are a common device in modern manguage -
especially acronyms, and abbreviations used by some people in a
wider technical community who might not unders