W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > July 2006

Re: [XHTML 2.0] emphesis

From: Jukka K. Korpela <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi>
Date: Sat, 8 Jul 2006 22:13:35 +0300 (EEST)
To: www-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.64.0607082206420.12247@korppi.cs.tut.fi>

On Sat, 8 Jul 2006, Ognyan Kulev wrote:

> In my view, <em> is emphasis
> <em>in flow of text</em> and in typography this is usually achieved by
> italics, and nested emphasis usually alternate roman and italic. Again
> in my view, <strong>&lt;strong&gt;</strong> is used when page is seen
> quickly and you need to find "points of interest", usually achieved by
> bold, but it may be underline for example.

That's more or less my understanding of the real idea behind <em> and 
<strong> in classical HTML. I'm afraid the situation hasn't been 
sufficiently analyzed yet. Shouldn't <strong> be <hilight> or <keyword> if 
it's for indicating "points of interest"? What about emphasizing entire 
paragraphs, such as a summary?

In typography, italics has traditionally been used in conjunction with 
serif fonts, and it often works poorly with sans-serif fonts. This is 
often the real reason for using <strong> (or, let us be realistic, <b>) in 
for emphasis, instead on <em> (or <i>).

Jukka "Yucca" Korpela, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Received on Saturday, 8 July 2006 19:13:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:06:13 UTC