Re: Cleaning House

On May 6, 2007, at 4:30 PM, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:

> Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>> You claimed that Web Apps 1.0 would somehow encourage more author  
>> use of <b> to mark up headers. I assumed no one would make this  
>> claim if they were aware of <h*>, <header>, the sectioning  
>> algorithm, and the fact that it does not condone use of <b> for  
>> headers in any way. Here's a direct quote: "The b element should  
>> be used as a last resort when no other element is more  
>> appropriate. In particular, headers should use the h1 to h6  
>> elements..." It also does not make <b> equivalent to <strong>.
> Turning this around, then: what situations do we have where people  
> would use <b> as a last resort? Apart from authoring tools that  
> only offer a B button? And not talking about legacy content (which  
> would have to be revised, even in light of the current spec).


"The b element represents a span of text to be stylistically offset  
from the normal prose without conveying any extra importance, such as  
key words in a document abstract, product names in a review, or other  
spans of text whose typical typographic presentation is boldened."

There's also some examples given.

Note that this is just what the current spec says. Some would argue  
that <b> should also be allowed for emphasizing uses of bold (thus  
giving an overlap of semantics with <strong>). But I think this is  
distinct from arguing whether <b> has any valid use and whether it  
should be removed. I would hope the kinds of uses above are non- 


Received on Sunday, 6 May 2007 23:46:57 UTC