- From: Jonathan Worent <jworent@yahoo.com>
- Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 08:16:17 -0700 (PDT)
- To: HTML Mailing List <www-html@w3.org>
--- David Dorward <david@dorward.me.uk> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 23, 2006 at 06:31:45AM -0700, Jonathan
> Worent wrote:
> > One of the reasons for suggesting this is so the
> level
> > of emphesis is explicit.
>
> How is <em level="2" /> more explicit than <em><em
> /></em>?
>
> > Rather that relying on css which may or may not be
> interpreted.
>
> There is no reliance here. It simply describes a way
> to tell the user
> about certain semantics in a document. There is no
> reason why a user
> agent could not do that by default.
>
> --
> David Dorward
> http://dorward.me.uk
>
>
>
Currently CSS is the only way to achieve more than two
levels of emphasis. I don't know of any browsers
(assistive technologies included) that interpret
<em><em>Reilly emphasized</em></em> as more than
<em>really emphasized</em>. Also, as this start to get
more and more emphasized (ex: indicating an escalating
argument) having <em><em><em><em>I'm
angry</em></em></em></em> gets really redundant IMO.
This also does not provide a way to indicate
de-emphasis.
If this were just an update of (x)html (eg xhtml 1.2
or html 4.2) I would have suggested something along
those lines; saying that it be required that more
emphasis be given to nested em's. I had <em
level="2">strongly</em> ::wink:: considered that.
However, since this is a new spec, and it has been
stated that it is not intended to be backwards
compatible, I believe this is a golden opportunity for
real improvement.
Jonathan Worent
Webmaster
www.epfmc.org
jonathan@epfmc.org
jworent@yahoo.com
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Received on Friday, 23 June 2006 15:16:25 UTC