W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2007

Re: missing principle

From: Smylers <Smylers@stripey.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2007 14:00:07 +0100
To: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20070428130007.GG20468@stripey.com>

Maciej Stachowiak writes:

> On Apr 28, 2007, at 1:11 AM, Mike Schinkel wrote:
> 
> > Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> > 
> > > On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 09:44:27 +0200, Mike Schinkel <w3c- 
> > > lists@mikeschinkel.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > True, but the important point is that a UA can never be sure why
> > > > the author used it so it can't be trusted as a semantic element.
> > > 
> > > That argument goes for *any* element.
> > 
> > Actually, it is not true for any element.  Some elements, such as  
> > <em> are almost never used except when the user wants to emphasize.
> 
> Lots of use of <em>  on the web appears to be to italicize for reasons
> other than  emphasis, because authors have been taught that <em> is
> "more  semantic" than <i> .

Or because the content's author used a wysiwyg editor and clicked on the
'i' button, which (misguidedly) inserts an <em> element.

Smylers
Received on Saturday, 28 April 2007 13:00:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:15:53 GMT