W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > May 2013

RE: indicating subtitles using small

From: Adrian Roselli <Roselli@algonquinstudios.com>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 17:02:15 +0000
To: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
CC: Ian Devlin <ian@iandevlin.com>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <0CB063710346B446A5B5DC305BF8EA3E728792@Ex2010MBX.development.algonquinstudios.com>

That's a great question that I cannot answer. I assumed it was another holdover, an attempt to justify how abused elements in the wild were already being used (I consider <b> and <i> to be in this came category).

Really, it's an element that authors are using the wrong way - not just visually, but because they think legal text is unimportant (regardless of how pretty it isn't in a layout).

From: Steve Faulkner [mailto:faulkner.steve@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2013 12:58 PM
To: Adrian Roselli
Cc: Ian Devlin; public-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: indicating subtitles using small

Ok, if its stylistic only why keep it?



HTML 5.1<http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>

On 20 May 2013 17:56, Adrian Roselli <Roselli@algonquinstudios.com<mailto:Roselli@algonquinstudios.com>> wrote:

The spec example of disclaimer text does not mean the text is any less important. If anything, that text is even more important because of its legal implications.

The purpose of <small> is to make it visually smaller. Since I don't believe it maps to a non-visual medium in any way (does a screen reader do something different with it?), <small> to me is strictly stylistic.

So, no, I don't think it semantically de-emphasizes text in any way nor should it.

As a visual reader/author, I can understand why it *feels* like it should de-emphasize, but unless that's how it's truly being used, and can map to a non-visual medium, I don't think it fits.

From: Steve Faulkner [mailto:faulkner.steve@gmail.com<mailto:faulkner.steve@gmail.com>]
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2013 12:42 PM
To: Ian Devlin
Cc: public-html@w3.org<mailto:public-html@w3.org>
Subject: Re: indicating subtitles using small

hi Ian also also think that the de-emphasis associated with using small while not explicitly stated, is implied
the spec says:
The small element does not "de-emphasize" or lower the importance of text emphasized by the em element or marked as important with the strong element. To mark text as not emphasized or important, simply do not mark it up with the em or strong elements respectively.

which seems odd to state unless it de-emphasises when used in other circumstances.



HTML 5.1<http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>

On 20 May 2013 17:03, Ian Devlin <ian@iandevlin.com<mailto:ian@iandevlin.com>> wrote:

Then I guess it depends on what "de-emphasize" means. Visually? It's not clear.

On 20 May 2013 17:28, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com<mailto:faulkner.steve@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi Ian,

In the cases cited I think that's the very reason  why it has been used, to make it smaller visually and thus de-emphasize it.


On 20 May 2013, at 16:17, Ian Devlin <ian@iandevlin.com<mailto:ian@iandevlin.com>> wrote:
Well the specification currently contains a note that says: "Small print typically features disclaimers, caveats, legal restrictions, or copyrights. Small print is also sometimes used for attribution, or for satisfying licensing requirements."

Such information is important, but using <small> in these cases would de-emphasize it, which probably isn't a good thing.
On 20 May 2013 16:30, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com<mailto:faulkner.steve@gmail.com>> wrote:
OK so there has been continuing discussion on the issue of using <small> in the comments of post about headings and subtitles[1]
and mallory[3] pointed out that according to bootstrap [2]:

"For de-emphasizing inline or blocks of text, use the small tag."

While I don't see a case for defining the <small> element as explicitly indicating a subtitle I am partial to the idea of <small> de-emphasizing text
This is deemed more important than <small>this</small>, by the author.

[1] http://html5doctor.com/howto-subheadings/
[2] http://twitter.github.io/bootstrap/base-css.html
[3] https://twitter.com/stommepoes/status/333196283294658560



HTML 5.1<http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>

On 9 April 2013 07:33, Angie Radtke <a.radtke@derauftritt.de<mailto:a.radtke@derauftritt.de>> wrote:
Am 08.04.2013 23:30, schrieb Åke Järvklo:

Small elements inside headings seems fine to me. I never considered this a
problem until the events leading up to tweets about boycotting Bootstrap
over this issue started the other day.

I think nobody wants  to boycott bootstrap.
It is only a CSS-Framework. If bootstrap-users (devs)  will use small inside the headlines it is their descion.
The only problem is that it is an example  in the bootstrap docs. So people with less knowledge will think that this is the right way.
It is not a big deal for the bootstrap-guys to add a class like "subtitle" to the css-files.
The decision to use small for subtitles comes out of missing alternatives.

I wasn't very lucky that Joomla! has choosen bootstrap, because it has more issues. But now I have to deal with it and I hope we can help the guys to make it better.

Bye Angie

www.der-auftritt.de<http://www.der-auftritt.de>  Büro für Kommunikation
Angie Radtke
Witterschlicker Allee 52
53125 Bonn

Fon: 0228 / 642 04 67


Joomla!-Templates entwickeln:
Barrierefreie & attraktive Designs von Konzept bis Umsetzung
ISBN-10: 3827328462
Received on Monday, 20 May 2013 17:02:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:46:02 UTC