Indeed. See also the bugs where these were set to use <b> and <i> https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=369 https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=370
And subsequent bugs asking for a change to <em> and <strong> which were marked as INVALID / WONTFIX. https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1038 https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7921 https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12550 Peter On 30 November 2013 04:35, Bartosz Dziewoński <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, 30 Nov 2013 13:22:20 +0100, max <[email protected]> wrote: > > I absolutely agree with your point. I wasn't aware that wiki-syntax >> inserts in fact <i> tags (and also <b> tags, which bring up the same >> problems). That needs to be changed. We need clean, semantic markup in >> order to adjust the styling to any given circumstances, as you perfectly >> described. >> > > This sucks, but it can't. The italics and bold weren't always used with > the semantic meaning of giving emphasis (as I mentioned in my previous > e-mail), so blindly replacing them with "semantic" tags and giving them > false meanings would be a step back. > > > -- > Matma Rex > > _______________________________________________ > Design mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design >
_______________________________________________ Design mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design
