Re: [WSG] POSH article question
On 11/1/07, Tom Livingston [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you are writing a book title, the you shouldn't use either, but rather something like a span class=book with your styling of choice. And don't forget, for something like a book there is always cite/cite (which italicizes by default). The overall idea is to add meaning to the text in the HTML and let CSS worry about presentation. If there is not an existing element to do what you need, that's when classes can come to the rescue. ~ Tim tjameswhite.com'http://www.tjameswhite.com;tjameswhite.com __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] POSH article question
Well, maybe this is better:
pLets make this word bvisually/b called out/p
p b{color:#f00; font-weight:normal;}
--
Tom Livingston | Senior Interactive Developer | Media Logic |
ph: 518.456.3015x231 | fx: 518.456.4279 | mlinc.com
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] POSH article question
On 2/11/07 (14:24) David said: p lang=enWe say yes, but the French say span lang='fr'Oui/ span/p Yes, David, I thought of the lang attribute about 3 seconds after I'd posted my reply, and in that particular example it is of course the perfect solution. Tom, if you use a span with a class assigned then you are able to imply semantic intention by the name that you give to the class. Hence class=foreignWord is better than class=italicised because although a machine will not pick up the meaning (since foreignWord is defined by me, not an official spec), someone looking at the code will. Seeing ibonjour/i they would know it was italicised but not necessarily know why. IMO that means that semantic class names are better than plain bold or italic. But there may be times when there is no semantic meaning to convey at all, in which case b and i are there to be used. HTH -- Rick Lecoat *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] POSH article question
Of course, if there was a tag for 'foreign language word' then the best
choice (for the example above) would be to use that -- but there isn't.
Perhaps the most semantic solution in the above example would be to wrap
the word in a span with a class assigned, like so:
HTML:
p We say yes, but the French say span class=foreignWordOui/
span/p
CSS:
.foreignWord {font-style: italic;}
Interesting, because I would have marked it up like this:
pWe say yes, but the French say em lang=frOui/em/p
Oops, I cut and pasted the ' ', but I wouldn't use them at all. Actually
I'd replace them with EM in both cases (for yes and oui):
pWe say emyes/em, but the French say em lang=frOui/em/p
--
Regards,
Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
RE: [WSG] POSH article question
p lang=enWe say yes, but the French say span lang='fr'Oui/
span/p
CSS:
.foreignWord {font-style: italic;}
[lang] { font-style: italic; }
[lang=en] { font-style: normal; }
What about:
span[lang] { font-style: italic; }
As a side note, I believe the attribute value should be between quotes
[lang=en]
--
Regards,
Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] POSH article question
q
The word (probably) does not require any semantic emphasis per se -- ie.
you are not giving it any enhanced meaning -- and so you would not use the
em tag but you strongDO/strong want to give it a visual-only
enhancement to make
it render in italics.
/q
Hope that helps.
Well done! That was perfect. Thanks.
Although for me personally, I'd prolly use b and i for bold and
italic text, vs. a span with a class and related style. I don't see
how the later is more semantic. Even if the design called for red text
as opposed to bold face, I could attack the b tag to achieve the
color, etc. through the style. And when styles are off, the visual
effect is intact.
pLets make this word bred/b to visually call it out/p
p b{color:#f00; font-weight:normal;}
No? Am I STILL in need of more coffee for this???
--
Tom Livingston | Senior Interactive Developer | Media Logic |
ph: 518.456.3015x231 | fx: 518.456.4279 | mlinc.com
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
RE: [WSG] POSH article question
Of course, if there was a tag for 'foreign language word' then the best
choice (for the example above) would be to use that -- but there isn't.
Perhaps the most semantic solution in the above example would be to wrap
the word in a span with a class assigned, like so:
HTML:
p We say yes, but the French say span class=foreignWordOui/
span/p
CSS:
.foreignWord {font-style: italic;}
Interesting, because I would have marked it up like this:
pWe say yes, but the French say em lang=frOui/em/p
But I'm French, so I may be a bit biased :-)
--
Regards,
Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] POSH article question
On 2/11/07 (12:36) Tom said: Another question though... do you have an example of proper, semantic use of strong vs b? Is it just just a tag to allow you to style your own visual emphasis? How about strong vs. em - what's the semantic difference? Rick actually provides a great example in his response. I've marked up his sentence below: q The word (probably) does not require any semantic emphasis per se -- ie. you are not giving it any enhanced meaning -- and so you would not use the em tag but you strongDO/strong want to give it a visual-only enhancement to make it render in italics. /q I've added strong /strong around DO. You can see that he is emphasizing a point there, so the markup emshould/em reflect that. [Even more emphasis for you.] In other words, listen to the way you speak. You can hear when you add emphasis, or really strong emphasis, to what you are saying. In HTML, those word(s) would get wrapped in em or strong As for b and i, well, I don't use them. They have no semantics per se, just visual effect. If I need something bolded or italicized I 1) see what element it is already in 2) look to see if there is an appropriate HTML element I could add 3) If 1 and 2 fail, I'll use a span class= with a semantically rich class name. (Or at least I try to make it semantically meaningful : ) Hope that helps. ~ Tim tjameswhite.com'http://www.tjameswhite.com;tjameswhite.com __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] POSH article question
On 2/11/07 (12:36) Tom said:
Another question though... do you have an example of proper, semantic
use of strong vs b? Is it just just a tag to allow you to style
your own visual emphasis? How about strong vs. em - what's the
semantic difference?
Don't have any convenient links to send you, Tom, but let me see if I
can give a verbal example.
When you say just a tag to allow you to style your own visual
emphasis, then THAT is when you should use a b or i. An example
might be a foreign language word -- traditionally styled in italics. The
word (probably) does not require any semantic emphasis per se -- ie. you
are not giving it any enhanced meaning -- and so you would not use the
em tag but you DO want to give it a visual-only enhancement to make it
render in italics.
The key here is that a device that reads your page by looking at the
code (eg a screen reader or a search engine) should *not* be led to
infer that the word has been emphasised -- because it hasn't, it's just
been italicised so that devices that read the page by looking at the
rendered version (eg. our eyes) can make assumptions based upon our
cultural context (hmm... words in italics are often plucked from
another language).
And I'm starting to get overly-wordy here, sorry.
Of course, if there was a tag for 'foreign language word' then the best
choice (for the example above) would be to use that -- but there isn't.
Perhaps the most semantic solution in the above example would be to wrap
the word in a span with a class assigned, like so:
HTML:
p We say yes, but the French say span class=foreignWordOui/
span/p
CSS:
.foreignWord {font-style: italic;}
Lastly: strong is a more emphatic version of em. As I understand it.
And the above guidelines would apply equally to the bold/strong debate.
Rule of thumb: think to yourself, regardless of how it *looks* on the
screen, what does the text I'm marking up *mean*?
If I'm off base here I'm sure others will correct me.
Best regards;
--
Rick Lecoat
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] POSH article question
Case in point, Wordpress doesn't offer i or b in the post editor, just em and strong, and yet the buttons for these say i and b! Annoying! Thanks Christian and others, Another question though... do you have an example of proper, semantic use of strong vs b? Is it just just a tag to allow you to style your own visual emphasis? How about strong vs. em - what's the semantic difference? Here's the shameful confession - I am guilty of blindly swapping these tags for b and i. Now I have to back up my argument to go back! :-P A reference link is fine here people, I don't expect anyone to sit and write me a lesson! :-) W3C wasn't to clear to me (shocker, I know)... Thanks! *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] POSH article question
Of course, if there was a tag for 'foreign language word' then the best
choice (for the example above) would be to use that -- but there isn't.
Perhaps the most semantic solution in the above example would be to wrap
the word in a span with a class assigned, like so:
HTML:
p We say yes, but the French say span class=foreignWordOui/
span/p
CSS:
.foreignWord {font-style: italic;}
Thanks Rick,
Not trying to beat a dead horse here, but two things.
I am not sure why the added code of a span with a class is MORE
semantic than i in your example, but I may still be thinking about
it from a visual standpoint...
Also, can you - or anyone else - give me an example of a semantic use
of em? Emphasized text as opposed to italicized? Around here, bold
text is emphasized text, if you know what I mean. :-P
Thanks for the discussion people!
--
Tom Livingston | Senior Interactive Developer | Media Logic |
ph: 518.456.3015x231 | fx: 518.456.4279 | mlinc.com
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] POSH article question
Well done! That was perfect. Thanks. You're welcome. Although for me personally, I'd prolly use b and i for bold and italic text, vs. a span with a class and related style. I don't see how the later is more semantic. Even if the design called for red text as opposed to bold face, I could attack the b tag to achieve the color, etc. through the style. And when styles are off, the visual effect is intact. If you just needed to style some text, and not add emphasis, then, yes, you could use b and i as you suggest. (And for the reason you suggest -- less mark up.) They haven't been deprecated so they are 'legal' to use. I will leave it at that. : ) ~ Tim tjameswhite.com'http://www.tjameswhite.com;tjameswhite.com __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] POSH article question
Tom said: pLets make this word bvisually/b called out/p But that would be a pain to maintain. Consider this: pMybStyled/bCompanyName is a really good company.../p ... pWe offer bwebsite optimization/b services.../p You want the b in the company name to be red because that's how your company's name is styled. You also want the b in the second paragraph styled red, but for a different reason. A few months later, you change your mind and want the company name to be styled with blue. If you had them both classed with the reason you wanted them red, you'd only have to change the stylesheet. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] POSH article question
On Nov 2, 2007 8:36 AM, Tom Livingston [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Case in point, Wordpress doesn't offer i or b in the post editor, just em and strong, and yet the buttons for these say i and b! Annoying! Thanks Christian and others, Another question though... do you have an example of proper, semantic use of strong vs b? Is it just just a tag to allow you to style your own visual emphasis? How about strong vs. em - what's the semantic difference? Here's the shameful confession - I am guilty of blindly swapping these tags for b and i. Now I have to back up my argument to go back! :-P I recommend looking at the recommended tags for HTML 5 to see some more attempts at creating semantic tags for uses of b and i. b and i have no semantic value, but there are lots of times when strong and em would be the wrong tag to use. Also, there's microformats but I don't know if those cover all the bases. -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.net *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] POSH article question
I don't think it was to imply that b and i are necessarily OK, though they are. The point was this... say you are referring to the title of a book. You can underline it, or you can italicize it... the correct thing to do when italics are available is to italicize it. So you would have done: iThe Call of the Wild/i by Jack London Now a careless standards-nut might come across that and do: emThe Call of the Wild/em by Jack London I'm pretty sure Roger was trying to discourage that sort of behavior. Case in point, Wordpress doesn't offer i or b in the post editor, just em and strong, and yet the buttons for these say i and b! Annoying! -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.net *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] POSH article question
On 11/1/07, Tom Livingston [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Use the em and strong elements for emphasis, not to make text bold or italic (i.e. do not mindlessly replace i and b with em and strong). Specifically, for example, if I want a few bold words in the middle of a sentence, what then should I use? Are b and i still ok to use? They aren't deprecated? I could have sworn reading a year or 2 ago that b and i were so last year I'm just still a little confused with this statement. I am SLOWLY trying to better my skill set here. Sorry if this is basic stuff to you... The idea is that you should use strong or em if you mean strong or emphasis. If you are writing a book title, the you shouldn't use either, but rather something like a span class=book with your styling of choice. It all comes down to semantic markup. em and strong mean something, b and i only have inferred meaning based on traditional publishing rules and context. --- Daniel Brumbaugh Keeney Devi Web Development [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] POSH article question
Hello Tom, To make it short (I haven't read the article, sorry), strong and em elements should be used to give semantic meaning to your text. This is fundamentally different than making text bold or italic, as these are only two visual ways of showing emphasis. Bold or italic text does not necessarily mean that the author wants to put emphasis on that piece of text (he may simply want to have his entire text bold because it looks better that way), while the strong and em elements do. Naturally, if you do not style the two elements, they appear the same visually as the old i and b tags. People tent to associate strong and em tags with that styling, but there are countless other ways of displaying emphasis (by making the text bigger, or changing the color for example). Hope that answers your question, -- Sébastien Sauvé To try to be better is to be better *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
