Hello Raphael,
Just because something is visual doesn't mean that it doesn't have meaning.
I have long been a member of the scientific community and I write Latin
arthropod binomials. This is a visual thing, but it's something I want --
and feel necessary -- to convey whether CSS is supported or not. This is a
long time pre-web practice. It's not emphatic, but it does have meaning,
albeit visual meaning, and CSS would suffice if it was supported by all
visual users. The "i" of course has no meaning to non-visual users (that's
where the language attribute has the most power in this example), but to all
visual users this is important. This would include text browsers,
conventional browsers without CSS support, and others if they exist.
I'm all for the proper separation, but being absolute doesn't necessarily
mean it's correct. There is a place for everything. So I guess I will
maintain my position that the two uses I outlined are in my opinion
legitimate. I suspect the W3C would agree with this else they'd deprecate
these elements, but they haven't. In light of this I imagine there is also a
legitimate use for the bold element though for the life of me I cannot
imagine what it would be.
Respectfully,
Mike Cherim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Raphael Martins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <wsg@webstandardsgroup.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2007 1:51 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of <b> and <i>
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]
*******************************************************************
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
