- From: Keith Calvert Ivey <kcivey@cpcug.org>
- Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 21:43:46 -0500
- To: www-html@w3.org
- CC: "Christopher R. Maden" <crm@ebt.com>
"Christopher R. Maden" <crm@ebt.com> wrote about <I>: > I *never* use it otherwise. There's always a reason I think > it should be italicized. Title? Use <cite>. Foreign word? > Use <em>. Variable? Use <var>. Ditto boldface or > underlining. I agree that there's always a reason that something's italicized, but the reason can't always be described in the current state of HTML. That and automated conversion are the reasons I use <I>. I don't understand why marking a foreign word with <EM> when you're not emphasizing it is any better than marking it with <I>. I'm not even sure about <CITE>; it seems a strange name to use for something indicating a title (but then <TITLE> was already taken). Wilbur says it's for "citations or references to other sources", which doesn't mean titles to mean. As soon as there's a widely supported way in HTML to indicate all the things that italics indicate in print (words used as words, foreign words, mathematical (but not programming) variables that aren't vectors or Greek letters, emphasized words, species names, titles, etc.), I'll stop using <I>. Not before. Keith C. Ivey <kcivey@cpcug.org> Washington, DC Untangling the Web <http://www.eei-alex.com/eye/utw/>
Received on Friday, 2 August 1996 21:39:29 UTC