I do not agree. The VISUAL impact or VISUAL meaning should be added by CSS. If you need italicized text, you´ll be probally trying to add some emphasis or differentiation in the page. Why should we hide this from our NON-VISUAL friends?
Legitimate <i> , it´s the same of legitimate <font>. It´s the presentation over meaning. :D Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote: Hello Andrew, Does anyone know of any other legitimate uses of these tags? For the life of me I cannot think of one legitimate use for the <b> element. If it's bold then the reason is probably strong emphasis thus <strong> should be used. Otherwise it should be made bold in the CSS. For the <i> element, though, I can think of a couple of legitimate uses: 1) To convey thought. Thought as in unspoken dialog should be italicized. This should be on the page, not CSS-styled so as to retain at least visual meaning. Example: <i>That's a good idea</i>, he thought to himself. 2) Language usage such as Latin as this is a long standing convention in print and must be retained (thus not styled via CSS). Example: <i lang="la">Lorem ispum</i> That's my thinking on the matter. Hope it helps. Respectfully, Mike Cherim http://green-beast.com/ ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ******************************************************************* ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *******************************************************************
