W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > September 2011

Re: Agenda Conf call 2011-sep-28

From: Florian Rivoal <florianr@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 12:17:12 +0900
To: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.v2jveyqe4p7avi@localhost.localdomain>
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 03:46:42 +0900, Eric Muller <emuller@adobe.com> wrote:

> On 9/27/2011 11:29 PM, John Daggett wrote:
>> Lots of general purpose software uses<em>  elements for UI (e.g. in
>> subject headers of forum postings).
>
> In other words, <em> is used ambiguously to denote emphasis (where
> emphasis marks are a good way to render the emphasis) and styling in
> italic/oblique (as in those headers, and also commonly in section titles
> in books, where emphasis marks would not be acceptable).

Yes. Note, however, that in those other cases where <em> is used to mark
titles, italic/oblique is not an acceptable styling in CJK any more than
emphasis marks would be. For example titles (which should use <cite>,not
<em>) in Japanese should be shown 『this way』.

In all cases where <em> was used semantically, emphasis marks are the
right thing to do. When it is used to mean some other thing that should be
styled as font-style:italic in English, neither emphasis marks nor italic
are the correct answer in CJK.

  - Florian

PS: Let's use the standards semantically:  
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Uir2MGC8g8
Received on Thursday, 29 September 2011 03:18:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:44 GMT