W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > May 2007

Re: Cleaning House

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 10:46:31 -0700
Message-Id: <0AFF9C25-E299-4FBD-A827-B815B2BCA06B@apple.com>
Cc: "'Henri Sivonen'" <hsivonen@iki.fi>, "'Patrick H.Lauke'" <redux@splintered.co.uk>, "'Boris Zbarsky'" <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>, www-html@w3.org, public-html@w3.org
To: "John Foliot - WATS.ca" <foliot@wats.ca>

On May 3, 2007, at 8:12 AM, John Foliot - WATS.ca wrote:

> It boils down to this:  If you want to Bold some text, or italicize  
> it, or
> underline it, you are doing so *for a reason*... I don't care  
> really what
> the reason is, you are doing so in a visual way to indicate some  
> connotation
> or other cue/clue to the end "reader", or consumer.

You may be doing it for a reason, but articulating that reason  
succinctly in words is still difficult and significantly adds to  
cognitive load.

> But if you can't *SEE* the bold, italic or underlined text, how do you
> convey that same cue/clue to the end consumer?  For the sighted user,
> presentational features are not bad, but for the non-sighted, pray  
> tell, how
> will you convey that same nuance?

T.V Raman, one of the few people in this group who uses an aural  
presentation full-time, has said that he likes the <b> and <i>  
elements. I'll let his explanation speak for itself: <http:// 

Received on Thursday, 3 May 2007 17:46:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 30 April 2020 16:21:02 UTC