Re: Render EM as underline [was: deprecated tags in Wilbur & Cougar] (fwd)

Matthew David (mdavid@ametekwater.com)
Thu, 1 Aug 1996 12:04:40 -0500


Message-Id: <199608011749.MAA14508@excel.net>
From: "Matthew David" <mdavid@ametekwater.com>
To: <www-html@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Render EM as underline [was: deprecated tags in Wilbur & Cougar] (fwd)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 12:04:40 -0500

Please, unsubscribe me from this mailing list.

----------
> From: Terje Norderhaug <Terje@in-progress.com>
> To: MegaZone <megazone@livingston.com>; www-html@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Render EM as underline [was: deprecated tags in Wilbur &
Cougar] (fwd)
> Date: Thursday, August 01, 1996 10:17 AM
> 
> At 6:26 PM 7/30/96, MegaZone wrote:
> >Once upon a time Terje Norderhaug shaped the electrons to say...
> >>I suggest to resolve the issue by that the guidelines for how a browser
> >>should render the EM element is changed from advising italics to
advising
> >>that the EM is rendered with underline.
> >
> >Never happen.  People expect EM to be italics in all major browsers, I
> >know I would not be alone it screaming my objections if that were even
> >considered.  Besides, people would just start using <I> if that change
> >happened.
> 
> I assume you refer to HTML authors when you say "people". Those that
would
> be using <EM> with requirements about how it will be rendered is probably
> using <I> anyway. A main feature of an element for describing what is
> emphasized is that you can change the rendering as appropriate.
> 
> >>Italics fonts doesn't display very well on screen anyway, and makes
text
> >>harder to read (if readbable at all). Rendering EM with italics also
mixes
> >
> >Looks lovely on my system, so speak for yourself.
> 
> I just did. I also spoke for others that have similar quality display or
> worse, which probably is the majority of people browsing the web.
> 
> >>with the common rendering of citations. By not providing U but rather
> >>suggest underline for EM, it would invite more people to use the
logical EM
> >>element with the associated long term advantages.
> >
> >For legal documents you *MUST* have underlining, no ambiguity.  They
need
> >a *physical* markup, NOT a *logical* markup that may change on the whim
of
> >a browser manufactuer.
> 
> Incidentially, I am writing this from a law office (in the US), so I
asked
> one of the attorneys what the big deal was about underlining. The answer
> was that it wasn't much of a requirement. Checking out some of the legal
> documents here showed underlining used for emphasis as well as for case
> references. Why wouldn't logical markup with the appropriate stylesheet
to
> ensure underlining when necessarry be good enough for the legal
profession?
> 
> 
> -- Terje <Terje@in-Progress.com>
>    http://www.ifi.uio.no/~terjen/
> 
>    Make your Web Site a Social Place with Interaction!
>    http://www.ifi.uio.no/~terjen/interaction
> 
>