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

Re: [RESEND] suggestion: modify <small> definition

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 10:45:47 -0400
Message-ID: <519B889B.2080001@mit.edu>
To: public-html@w3.org
On 5/21/13 10:33 AM, Adrian Roselli wrote:
> Neither <strong>, <em>, nor <small> have grades -- they are all or nothing. Nesting *can* imply more (actually, can it?), but without additional styling doesn't amount to any presentation differences.

1) The recommended UA stylesheet for HTML5 contains:

   b, strong { font-weight: bolder; }

Which means that if you have decent fonts in multiple bold weights, 
something like this:

   <strong>I am <strong>stronger</strong></strong>

will in fact have the "stronger" as bolder weight than "I am".

2) Nested emphasis, while not as well supported in HTML is commonly used 
in print; typically what you will have is something like:

   Some <em>very <em>emphasized</em> text</em>

Where the "very" and "text" are italic and the "emphasized" is not.

3) The recommended UA stylesheet for HTML5 contains:

  small { font-size: smaller; }

so again nested <small> will in fact give you the "this is even smaller" 
styling, up to a point.

Received on Tuesday, 21 May 2013 14:46:23 UTC

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