W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > May 2004

Re: Markup for emphasis and de-emphasis

From: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 07:45:26 +0100 (BST)
Message-Id: <200405030645.i436jQt08574@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
To: www-html@w3.org

> If continuity with HTML tradition is to be broken, the <strong> element
> would best be renamed to <key> or <hilite>. Personally, I think there's

What you seem to be proposing is too separate changes:

1) delete strong;
2) add a keyphrases element.

I don't believe traditional usage of strong has been to highlight 
candidates for an abstract.

Often, of course, in a well structured document, headings serve the
purpose of identifying the general trend of the document, and bold is
often abused for the purposes of indicating a heading, so there may 
be some people who use strong as a politically correct bold when they
really should be using Hn.

Not very much on the web, but commonly in magazines and newspapers,
quotes and sub-headings are used not as real headings, but as a 
combination of a stylistic technique, to break up large runs of text
at fairly arbitrary places, and to interpose key phrases (often those
that reflect the editorial policy) in parallel with the main document.
Such parallel inclusion represents a separate information stream and
a structural document format ought to provide them as a separate block
of data (then use styling to interleave them with the primary stream).
Received on Monday, 3 May 2004 02:45:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:16:00 GMT