[whatwg] Entity parsing

Kristof Zelechovski giecrilj at stegny.2a.pl
Fri Jun 22 02:50:35 PDT 2007

A dieresis is not an umlaut so I have to bite my tongue each time I write or
read nonsense like ï.  It feels like lying.  Umlaut means "mixed", a
dieresis means "standalone".  Those are very different things, and "I" can
never gets mixed so there is no ambiguïty.  Since "umlaut" is borrowed from
German, I can see no problem in borrowing "tréma" from French.  I personally
prefer "&itrema;" to "&idier;" because of readability, but I would not
insist on that.

-----Original Message-----
From: whatwg-bounces at lists.whatwg.org
[mailto:whatwg-bounces at lists.whatwg.org] On Behalf Of Ian Hickson
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2007 6:09 AM
To: whatwg at whatwg.org
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Entity parsing

On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Kitof elechovski wrote:
> Aside: I know that it can be changed but "iuml" is a very unfortunate 
> name for "i trma".  How about deprecating "iuml" in favor of "itrema"?

We're not deprecating anything, and just introducing a new name for i-uml 
would be a dangerous slippery slope to start down. Anyway, i-umlaut is 
fine, and easier to spell than i-diaeresis; why would you call "itrema"? 
Trema doesn't seem any more common than "umlaut"...

More information about the whatwg mailing list