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

Re: Re: [XHTML 2.0] emphesis

From: Jonathan Worent <jworent@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 06:31:45 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <20060623133145.46050.qmail@web32212.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
To: HTML Mailing List <www-html@w3.org>

--- Alexandre Alapetite <alexandre@alapetite.net>
wrote:

> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> 1) Concerning the levels of emphasis, the current
> XHTML 1.x allows  
> imbrications of several <strong> and/or <em> tags.
> Although I
> am not aware of any browser taking advantage per
> default of this fact, you  
> can perfectly create a CSS style to render
> <strong><strong>test</strong></strong> in a
> different way than  
> <strong>test</strong>, and this is in my opinion
> easier than with
> various levels. Furthermore, this existing behaviour
> is imho stronger than  
> the proposed level attribute, when considering
> longer
> sentences, where the default text is at level 0, a
> part of the sentence at  
> level 1 and one word at level 2:
> 
>   <p>This is a sentence where I <strong>say
> something <strong>very</strong>  
> important</strong>!</p>
> 
> Then in CSS, you could have something such as:
> 
>   p {
>    font-size:medium;
>    voice-volume:soft;
>   }
>   strong {
>    font-size:120%
>    voice-volume:200%;
>   }
> 
> Tested with success with Opera 9 (using
> -xv-voice-volume:).

One of the reasons for suggesting this is so the level
of emphesis is explicit. Rather that relying on css
which may or may not be interpreted. But while we're
on the subject... CSS Attribure Selectors will do the
trick more efficiently imho
(http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/selector.html#attribute-selectors).

> 
> 2) In my understanding, <strong> and <em> have two
> different semantic  
> meanings. 

To quote the HTML 4.01 spec
(http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/text.html#h-9.2.1)
"EM: indicates emphesis. STRONG: Indicates stronger
emphesis.

>I usually use <strong> to highlight
> something
> more important than the rest of the text, and <em>
> to highlight something  
> that is different (e.g. strange, not expected,
> funny,
> different context...) than the rest of the text. For
> me, making an analogy  
> with the human voice, or CSS speech, <strong> would
> be the loudness (voice-volume), while <em> would be
> the style of the voice  
> (e.g. voice-pitch).
> 
> Cordially,
> Alexandre
> http://alexandre.alapetite.net
> 
> 
> ---- Original Message ----
> From: Jonathan Worent <jworent@yahoo.com>
> Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 11:42:53 -0700 (PDT)
> Message-ID:
>
<20060620184253.1793.qmail@web32204.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> To: www-html@w3.org
> 
> I would like to suggest a change to the way empehsis
> is coded. Instead of  
> either &lt;strong&gt; and &lt;em&gt; I suggest
> $lt;em
> level="#"&gt;. "#" Represents the level of emphesis
> either positivly or  
> negatively. It would need to be agreed upon a limit
> to
> the levels for obvious reasons. I suggest 5.
> 
> 
> Currently there are only two levels of emphesis. If
> you want to give  
> something more or less emphesis you have to use css.
> To get
> the proper effect you must account for that both
> visually and auraly. But  
> what happens if the css is ignored? You're back to
> two
> levels of emphesis and you lose the desired effect.
> 
> I suggest negitive levels to allow de-emphesis.
> Something that is  
> currently lacking.
> 
> As an example lest say you are writing out a
> transcript of a podcast (as  
> per the WCAG) There is no way to mark-up if
> something
> is whispered, empesized, or yelled.
> 
> Also, strong is just a stronger emphesis. Its
> redundant to have multiple  
> tags.
> 
> 
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
Received on Friday, 23 June 2006 13:31:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:16:06 GMT