I've always had a problem understanding why <em> and <strong> are supposedly more semantic than <i> and <b>. Italics don't necessarily indicate emphasis and bold doesn't necessarily indicate importance. Often they're nods to traditional comprehension of things or to the organisation of a text so as to aid understanding.
In fact, if you ask me, the instinctive, natural distinction between 'emphasis' and 'strong' is fuzzy, despite html5's attempt to define it. On the other hand, if <i> plainly means 'italic', and results in an italic font being displayed, then that to me is straightforward and unambiguous and no messing about. When I read it I can understand it however I prefer and according to the context. Same goes for 'bold'. Of course if you style <i> in the css to produce a different, non-italic style then, yes, that's very unsemantic. But seeing as <i> and <b> will be legit for the foreseeable future I'll prefer them over <em> and <strong>. They're quicker to key, too. Peter H. ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
