Just popped back in my head. Internally at Yahoo, web standards is sold as ‘LSM’, Layered Semantic Markup. Actually, I’m sort of half-and-half on either term. ‘web standards’ really isn’t all that descriptive. HTML 3.2 is a web standard. In fact, nothing in the spec says you can’t lay out tables and spacers and not be completely valid and conformant. On the other hand, the term semantic markup gets thrown around way too much. It’d be easy to replace the ‘S’ w/ structured, but I agree with Tim that ‘descriptive’ might be the most accurate term. That being said, and while at the end of the day, I’m just not convinced on how semantically rich (X)HTML is, I guess semantics (meaning) is the goal, so maybe it’s okay. Also, I do really like the ‘layered’ part, which suggests the idea of organizing around different qualia. And nothing like a TLA to convince the PHBs of the ROI of LSM.
Okaaay, back to work.
(before that, this is a stupendously awesome troll (now at 0, Insightful — YHBT. YHL. HAND.)