W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > August 2002

Re: Comments on XHTML 2.0 Working Draft

From: Joanne Hunter <jrhunter@menagerie.tf>
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 22:11:26 -0400
To: www-html@w3.org
Message-Id: <20020807221126.2038c8fb.jrhunter@menagerie.tf>

The following text was discovered Wednesday 07 August 2002 in a note
attributed to one "Mark Gallagher <mark@cyberfuddle.com>":

> 
> Jonny Axelsson wrote:
> > 07.08.02 11:58:24, Jonas JÝrgensen <jonasj@jonasj.dk> wrote:
> 
> <snip />
> 
> >>Why should strong be deprecated?
> > 
> > Because it is really <b> by another name. <strong> is different from
> > <em> (emphasis) in that there is a real use for emphasis, while "strong 
> > emphasis" is an artifact from the earliest days of HTML, there is no
> > such thing outside the world of HTML. 
> 
> I think it's to do with the level of emphasis.  I'm EMPHASISING *each* 
> /word/ _differently_ <here>.  I think there is a use for different 
> levels (compare stressing your voice to snarling to shouting IRL), 
> however it'd probably be better as:
> 
> <emphasis level="weak">
> <emphasis level="strong">

I usually just nest <em> elements and add some styling like so:
em { font-style: normal; /* to get rid of defaults */
     font-weight: bold; }
em em { text-decoration: underline; }

or perhaps font-weight: bolder;, or font-style: italic;, etc.


-- 
Joanne Hunter <http://menagerie.tf/~jrhunter/>  Say No to HTML Mail!/"\
 Of course, I don't know how interesting any of this really is,     \ /
 but now you've got it in your brain cells so you're stuck with it.  X
      --Gary Larson                            ASCII Ribbon Campaign/ \
Received on Wednesday, 7 August 2002 22:14:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:52 GMT