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

Re: Cleaning House

From: Maurice <maurice@thymeonline.com>
Date: Thu, 03 May 2007 14:36:07 -0400
To: HTML Working Group <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <C25FA3D7.2531%maurice@thymeonline.com>

On 5/3/07 2:10 PM, "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk> wrote:

> Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>> T.V Raman, one of the few people in this group who uses an aural
>> presentation full-time, has said that he likes the <b> and <i> elements.
>> I'll let his explanation speak for itself:
>> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007JanMar/0668.html>.
> "it matters little at
> the end of the day if the emphasized text  came through encoded
> as <em> or <i> once you have defined the same aural rule for both
> elements."
> that's a "duh!" kind of comment, sorry. If I tell my user agent to treat
> both X and Y the same, it doesn't make a difference to me whether you've
> used X or Y. No kidding! This isn't even circular logic, this is just
> circular full stop.
> "I dont believe visual web browsers have made this distinction
> anyway, in which case there is no real distinction."
> Which doesn't mean there isn't a distinction. Sighted users of visual
> web browsers can, if they so wish, set their own styles to override the
> non-distinct presentation. New user agents can implement a visual
> differentiation. Tools can be built that can extract further meaning
> from the differentiation.
> Saying that, because current visual implementations don't distinguish,
> it doesn't matter, is pretty much precluding any possible distinction in
> the future by just wrongly ratifying that there is no distinction.
> Also worth noting that Raman's opinion/preference is just that - a
> single user's opinion and preference. It is worth taking that into
> consideration.
> P

I like the latex example:

> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007JanMar/0668.html
> In markup languages like LaTeX the \em had a minor but key
> difference with \it --
> LaTeX was smart enough to render \em as something distinctive if
> it was used within content that was already italicized ---
> otherwise \em and \it were equivalent.
> I dont believe visual web browsers have made this distinction
> anyway, in which case there is no real distinction.

That makes sense to me.

<i>Is visually easier to distinguish from the surrounding text but is not
always more important</i>

<em> Same for em </em>

<i><em>IS really really important</em></i>

::   thyme online ltd
::   po box cb13650  nassau  the bahamas
::   website: http://www.thymeonline.com/
::   tel: 242 327-1864  fax: 242 377 1038
Received on Thursday, 3 May 2007 18:36:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:20 UTC