- From: Stephen Deach <sdeach@adobe.com>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 16:05:45 -0800
- To: Andrew Cunningham <andrewc@vicnet.net.au>, www-international@w3.org
A historical caution. People have been attempting to kill the use of <i> since the inception of Gencode[tm] (~1980 predecessor of SGML, then thru HTML, then thru XML). It isn't going to happen. Using <em> keeps getting proposed, but never gains traction. My suggestion: treat <i> as if it was <em> for languages where "italic" is not a preferred representation. Add another tag if you "really" want shatai (the closest Japanese has to italic for ideographic glyphs). At 2008.02.01-08:35(+1100), Andrew Cunningham wrote: >I suspect that my concerns about the <i> element is that to my mind it is >presentational. I know that some people argue that it can have semantic >meaning. But it only has semantic meaning if you assume that all languages >and scripts on the web have to follow the typesetting and typographic >traditions of Europe. > >Note that the conventions for italicization only allied to print >publications, handwritten material and material prepared on a typewriter >often used alternative conventions. > >In the early days of the web, and even now, you'll find articles and posts >discussing how to bring good typographic practice to the web. Generally >this centres on the needs and concerns of English or a few other European >languages. > >Just look a the core non-Latin fonts on a standard operating system. Some >scripts will only have one weight and style. Some fonts may be available >in two weights. > >It is rare for a non Latin, Cyrillic or Greek typeface to have an italic >or oblique version. > >Not even sure if I've ever seen an italic or oblique CJK font. I know I >don't have any installed on my system, despite the number of fonts >installed over the years. > >Even CSS3 is merely a step in the right direction. With a range of >Latin/Cyrillic typographic conventions well embedded in CSS. > >The styling of web sites should be responsive to language and the >typographic traditions of each language. > >Andrew > >KUROSAKA Teruhiko wrote: >> >>>I'm wondering if anyone could answer a couple of questions for me. As I >>>understand it Japanese doesn’t use italics as a form of emphasis, so >>>using |<i>| tags around ideographic text is a big no no. Can anyone >>Not necessarily. Use of italic in Japanese text is rare but not wrong. >>By the way, the <i> tag will no longer mean italic when the now draft HTML5 >>becomes the standard. Here's a quote from: >>http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/#the-i >>--------------------------------------------------- >>The i element should be used as a last resort when no other element is more >>appropriate. In particular, citations should use the cite element, >>defining instances >>of terms should use the dfn element, stress emphasis should use the em >>element, >>importance should be denoted with the strong element, quotes should be marked >>up with the q element, and small print should use the small element. >>Style sheets can be used to format i elements, just like any other >>element can be >>restyled. Thus, it is not the case that content in i elements will >>necessarily >>be italicised. >>--------------------------------------------------- > >-- >Andrew Cunningham >Research and Development Coordinator (Vicnet) >State Library of Victoria >328 Swanston Street >Melbourne VIC 3000 >Australia > >Email: andrewc+AEA-vicnet.net.au >Alt. email: lang.support+AEA-gmail.com > >Ph: +613-8664-7430 Fax:+613-9639-2175 >Mob: 0421-450-816 > >http://www.slv.vic.gov.au/ http://www.vicnet.net.au/ >http://www.openroad.net.au/ http://www.mylanguage.gov.au/ >http://home.vicnet.net.au/~andrewc/ > ---Steve Deach sdeach@adobe.com
Received on Friday, 1 February 2008 00:06:58 UTC