W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2018

Re: Bold vs Strong

From: Katie Haritos-Shea <ryladog@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2018 09:26:33 -0400
Message-ID: <CAEy-OxHOGzkMdbnCUovnzKL1q+-8auoQWLybUBJ+-+s_d49yDQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: talilief@gmail.com
Cc: Vinil Peter <vinilpeter.wcag@gmail.com>, WAI Interest Group <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
I thought <b> and <i> originally came out of SGML.....before HTML

** katie **

*Katie Haritos-Shea*

*Principal ICT Accessibility Architect, **Board Member and W3C Advisory
Committee Rep for Knowbility *

*WCAG/Section 508/ADA/AODA/QA/FinServ/FinTech/Privacy,* *IAAP CPACC+WAS = *
*CPWA* <http://www.accessibilityassociation.org/cpwacertificants>

*Cell: **703-371-5545 <703-371-5545>** |* *ryladog@gmail.com
<ryladog@gmail.com>* *| **Oakton, VA **|* *LinkedIn Profile
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/katieharitosshea/>*

People may forget exactly what it was that you said or did, but they will
never forget how you made them feel.......

Our scars remind us of where we have been........they do not have to
dictate where we are going.



On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 8:50 AM Taliesin Smith <talilief@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Folks,
>
> I found a tweet yesterday (thanks Aidan Tierney) that linked to an A List
> Apart article on *Conversational Semantics* by *Aaron Gustafson*. I think
> this article sheds some light on this conversation, so here is the url:
> https://alistapart.com/article/conversational-semantics
>
> Taliesin
>
> On Aug 5, 2018, at 12:40 PM, Vinil Peter <vinilpeter.wcag@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
> I have been asked to provide my thoughts on a debate on the use of bold
> <b> and strong <strong> for one of my clients. The client's internal
> accessibility testing team marked all the instances where <b> was used as
> errors and recommended to change them to <strong> so that screen readers
> read out the text with added emphasis. This has brought their quality and
> compliance scores down drastically. The client's developers are unhappy
> about this and claim that they should not be marked down as there is no
> clear guideline or fine print that mandates use of <strong> over <b>.
> Moreover, W3C has not deprecated <b> yet and it's usage is still permitted.
> <b> has been in use since ages and asking to replace all bold text with
> strong is like declaring that  use of <b> should be banned henceforth.
>
> I am planning to give my recommendation to use <strong> in headers or
> functionality names etc. if the text is bold as per  design, while it is
> still fair to allow use of <b> for other bold text. The 'appropriate usage'
> of bold or strong is finally the designer's call as there is no clear
> guideline.
>
> Is my recommendation correct or am I missing something? What your thoughts
> and have you come across any such debate?
>
> Regards,
> Vinil Peter, PMP
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 6 September 2018 13:27:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:37:20 UTC