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 15:01:32 -0500 (EST)
To: www-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.95q.1000120145654.18602A-100000@wronski.math.uwaterloo.ca>
On Thu, 20 Jan 2000, Jan Roland Eriksson wrote:

> If you are referring to a visual presentation of 'italic' within
> 'italic' your statement is not correct according to what I have learned
> from traditional typesetting practices.
> 
> 'italic' (or cursive really) within 'italic' reverts to the normal font
> presentation as per recommendations from the "old timers lead poisoned
> brain" :)

Are you sure about this?  Or are the ``old timers lead poisoned brain''
really trying to say if emphisis is nested in ephisis then to revert to
the normal font.  I suspect this is the case (I'm no expert), and that
the difference between style and semantics was blurred in the old days, so
hence the poor phrasing of the rule.

I honestly expect everything inside and <i> elment to be in italics
regardless of the context.  Why would I have said ``put this in italics''
if that's not why I wanted?

-- 
Russell O'Connor                           roconnor@uwaterloo.ca
       <http://www.undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca/~roconnor/>
``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 15:01:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:41 GMT