W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2002

Re: <strong>/<em> instead of <b>/<i>

From: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 22:32:36 +0000 (GMT)
Message-Id: <200201252232.g0PMWbd16635@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> Does the nesting create an even stronger emphasis than just the strong? 

Yes.  It has actually been argued that <strong> is redundant and
confusing, and could better be represented as <em><em>....</em></em>.

> If it was nested the other way, em within strong, would that make no
> difference?

Semantically it makes little difference.  However, in terms of style
sheets, these are two different cases.  Also, some browsers don't even
get the simple nesting right (I think there was a bug report on Amaya
on this recently), and I don't think any have rules in their default
style sheets, or hard coded equivalent, to cope with recursion of
em or strong, although these are meaningful, even if difficult to render
in speech.

> 2. Should I use strong or em for titles, like in a bibliography? Or, if the

No.  You should use the designed for the purpose element, cite.
Received on Friday, 25 January 2002 17:56:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:00 GMT