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

Re: Cleaning House

From: Andrew Sidwell <takkaria@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 03 May 2007 18:28:58 +0100
Message-ID: <463A1BDA.1010205@gmail.com>
To: Maurice <maurice@thymeonline.com>
CC: HTML Working Group <public-html@w3.org>

Maurice wrote:
<snip>
> Um..i don't have any answers but I do have this.
> 
> <p class=MsoNormal>Abcd <i><u>efghijk lmnop <b>qrs</b></u></i><span
> style='font-style:normal'><u><b> tuv</b></u></span><u>
> wxyz<o:p></o:p></u></p>
> 
> Spent a couple minutes randomly highlighting portions of a paragraph in Word
> and bold/italics/underlining parts of it.
> 
> I can't seem to get it to output the often used example of:
> 
> <b> this is <i> a sentence </b> made of words</i>

I'd hope not, too.  However messy their produced markup may be, it
should at least be properly nested.

> Could we get some feedback from microsoft why they use <b> instead of
> <strong>? 

Did you ask for bold, or was there a "strong emphasis" button in Word?
The two are actually not the same.  Just because they *look* the same
doesn't mean they are.  If they were the same, then <b> is just as good
a tag as <strong> (except better, since <b> is five characters shorter).

> Also, they put spans all over the place. They could have just used spans
> with styles instead of b,I,and u tags.

And you would have an extra 32 characters per bold tag:

<span style="font-weight:bold;"></span>
<b></b>12345678901234567890123456789012

IMO they should just use <b>, as they do already: it's much more readable.

Andrew Sidwell
Received on Thursday, 3 May 2007 17:28:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:44 UTC