W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > January 2000

Re: Physical markup concept snag

From: Russell Steven Shawn O'Connor <roconnor@uwaterloo.ca>
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 13:56:21 -0500 (EST)
To: W3C HTML <www-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.95q.1000120135149.1680B-100000@wronski.math.uwaterloo.ca>
On Thu, 20 Jan 2000, Nir Dagan wrote:

> I think that <b> and <strong> are exactly identical in every practical 
> and theoretical respect (up to the wording of some specs.), 
> so it is a matter of taste.

I think the main differnce is illustrated as follow.  Here I'm comparing
<i> elments to <em> elements.

<i> this is <i>nested italics</i></i>.
<em> this is <em>nested emphisis</em></em>.

In the first case, clearly everything should be in italics.
In the second case, using <em>, the nested <em> data should be rendered in
some other way, commonly a monospaced different font.

So <em> is different from <i>.

Russell O'Connor                           roconnor@uwaterloo.ca
``Paradoxically, a refusal to `put a monetary value on life' means that
life is often undervalued.'' -- Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach
Received on Thursday, 20 January 2000 13:56:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:52 UTC