- From: Florian Rivoal <florianr@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 12:17:12 +0900
- To: www-style@w3.org
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 03:46:42 +0900, Eric Muller <emuller@adobe.com> wrote: > On 9/27/2011 11:29 PM, John Daggett wrote: >> Lots of general purpose software uses<em> elements for UI (e.g. in >> subject headers of forum postings). > > In other words, <em> is used ambiguously to denote emphasis (where > emphasis marks are a good way to render the emphasis) and styling in > italic/oblique (as in those headers, and also commonly in section titles > in books, where emphasis marks would not be acceptable). Yes. Note, however, that in those other cases where <em> is used to mark titles, italic/oblique is not an acceptable styling in CJK any more than emphasis marks would be. For example titles (which should use <cite>,not <em>) in Japanese should be shown 『this way』. In all cases where <em> was used semantically, emphasis marks are the right thing to do. When it is used to mean some other thing that should be styled as font-style:italic in English, neither emphasis marks nor italic are the correct answer in CJK. - Florian PS: Let's use the standards semantically: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Uir2MGC8g8
Received on Thursday, 29 September 2011 03:18:01 UTC