- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charlesn@srl.rmit.EDU.AU>
- Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 22:23:50 +1100 (EST)
- To: Nir Dagan <nir@nirdagan.com>
- cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Yes. This is what the guideline about using the standard recommendations, correctly, is about. Charles McCathieNevile On Wed, 18 Nov 1998, Nir Dagan wrote: > The common statement "use <EM> instead > of <I>" can be quite misleading. > > One should use EM, CITE, VAR, DFN, etc. instead of I. > > When speaking emphasizing is pronounced differently that > mentioning a name of book or newspaper. Al tells as that > this is the case also in Brille. In visual media they > are all rendered the same. > > Because <I> has no semantics in parctice all media > which do not render italics translate <I> to <EM> by default. > (this may be ofcourse a controvertial practice; one may > suggest that they should ignore the typographical hint altogether) > Therefore using <EM> instead of <I> doesn't matter per current > browser practice; it is more a matter of elegance and the > simplicity of following the principle of using "structural" rather > than typographical elements. > > What realy matters is to use CITE, VAR etc. when appropriate > and not I or EM for all "italized" words. > > Some people who try to improve their documents do > so by replacing all their <I> with <EM>. This is an error. > > Netscape composer of Communicator 4.0 replaces > all <EM> <CITE> <VAR> and <DFN> of a document written > elsewhere with <I>, when resaving the document, and it does this > without BLINKing... > > Nir Dagan, Ph.D. > http://www.nirdagan.com > mailto:nir@nirdagan.com > > "There is nothing quite so practical as a good theory." > -- A. Einstein > >
Received on Wednesday, 18 November 1998 06:27:40 UTC