- From: Joanne Hunter <jrhunter@menagerie.tf>
- Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 22:11:26 -0400
- To: www-html@w3.org
The following text was discovered Wednesday 07 August 2002 in a note
attributed to one "Mark Gallagher <mark@cyberfuddle.com>":
>
> Jonny Axelsson wrote:
> > 07.08.02 11:58:24, Jonas Jørgensen <jonasj@jonasj.dk> wrote:
>
> <snip />
>
> >>Why should strong be deprecated?
> >
> > Because it is really <b> by another name. <strong> is different from
> > <em> (emphasis) in that there is a real use for emphasis, while "strong
> > emphasis" is an artifact from the earliest days of HTML, there is no
> > such thing outside the world of HTML.
>
> I think it's to do with the level of emphasis. I'm EMPHASISING *each*
> /word/ _differently_ <here>. I think there is a use for different
> levels (compare stressing your voice to snarling to shouting IRL),
> however it'd probably be better as:
>
> <emphasis level="weak">
> <emphasis level="strong">
I usually just nest <em> elements and add some styling like so:
em { font-style: normal; /* to get rid of defaults */
font-weight: bold; }
em em { text-decoration: underline; }
or perhaps font-weight: bolder;, or font-style: italic;, etc.
--
Joanne Hunter <http://menagerie.tf/~jrhunter/> Say No to HTML Mail!/"\
Of course, I don't know how interesting any of this really is, \ /
but now you've got it in your brain cells so you're stuck with it. X
--Gary Larson ASCII Ribbon Campaign/ \
Received on Wednesday, 7 August 2002 22:14:06 UTC