W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2007

Re: missing principle

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2007 01:53:52 -0700
Message-Id: <52AA41B9-6F0A-44B7-853A-018BC8B69D68@apple.com>
Cc: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
To: Mike Schinkel <w3c-lists@mikeschinkel.com>

On Apr 28, 2007, at 1:11 AM, Mike Schinkel wrote:

> Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 09:44:27 +0200, Mike Schinkel <w3c- 
>> lists@mikeschinkel.com> wrote:
>>> True, but the important point is that a UA can never be sure why  
>>> the author used it so it can't be trusted as a semantic element.
>> That argument goes for *any* element.
> Actually, it is not true for any element.  Some elements, such as  
> <em> are almost never used except when the user wants to emphasize.

I don't think the evidence supports that claim. Lots of use of <em>  
on the web appears to be to italicize for reasons other than  
emphasis, because authors have been taught that <em> is "more  
semantic" than <i>.

Received on Saturday, 28 April 2007 08:54:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:19 UTC