Kepler Gelotte skrev:
Hi,
I am just curious if anyone can explain why the u tag has been deprecated
while b and i are still allowed.
Summary (most things have been said already):
Underlines on paper have no usability impact, since you cant click on
it! Underlines on web pages have a
Hello.
Is underline really needed? What for?
---
С уважением,
Алексей Новиков.
Электронная почта: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
http://blog.micromarketing.ru/
Действительно интересный блог
об интернете, маркетинге, рекламе и PR своими руками
At 3/28/2008 01:14 PM, Àëåêñåé Íîâèêîâ wrote:
Is underline really needed? What for?
Underline is a method for highlighting
(emphasizing) Roman text. As far as I know it
was invented with the typewriter, being a way to
highlight a bit of text using a machine that was
limited to a single
I do the exact same thing (clicking on underlined text which isn't a
link) but it does make it very complicated to create access keys for
forms because u was used to show which letter was the access key.
Messing around with endless spans will discourage them. I'm really sorry
there is no
On 27 Mar 2008, at 12:32, IceKat wrote:
I do the exact same thing (clicking on underlined text which isn't
a link) but it does make it very complicated to create access keys
for forms because u was used to show which letter was the access
key. Messing around with endless spans will
em and strong are NOT for screen readers. they are for the semantic markup.
screen readers do not render em and strong, they read it as plain text.
2008/3/27, IceKat [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I do the exact same thing (clicking on underlined text which isn't a
link) but it does make it very
But semantic mark-up such as em and strong is there for user-agents
such as screen-readers to use. That they do not currently render them as
different from normal text does not mean that it is not the intention.
We create Web standards that user-agents can work towards implementing (if
they
I think that b and i are equivalent to u and that they probably
should be deprecated. They probably will be in HTML5 (though I haven't
looked). In my opinion, those are purely style, not semantic, and should
be done with CSS.
Joseph Ortenzi wrote:
Very good points
b and i are stylistic and
Hi,
I am just curious if anyone can explain why the u tag has been deprecated
while b and i are still allowed.
Thanks in advance.
Best regards,
Kepler Gelotte
Neighbor Webmaster, Inc.
156 Normandy Dr., Piscataway, NJ 08854
www.neighborwebmaster.com
phone/fax: (732) 302-0904
Hi Kepler,
In many ways, b has been deprecated in favour of strong and i in
favour of em (emphasis). u (underline) has been deprecated because
it shouldn't be part of structural markup, but instead part of styling,
so it would be replaced by span class=underline/span or similar.
The reason
Here I found they are not technically depreciated but they have
recommended replacements
|b| Although technically not deprecated, W3C recommends the |strong
|element be used instead.
|i| Although technically not deprecated, W3C recommends the |em
|element be used instead.
Thanks for the explanation John.
I think the standards group still should have deprecated b and i though.
Seems a pretty weak argument to say that strong and em will be misused
because b and i already are.
Bold and italics can be controlled through CSS as well, leaving HTML as
clean and semantic
The presentational elements such as b, i, s and u are deprecated as
because it can be achieved by CSS. For example, u can be achieved by
*text-decoration:
underline*;.
I think, em and strong have been left for *screen readers* to understand
the emphasize part.
Thanks!
Venkatesan M
On Thu, Mar
] On
Behalf Of Mahendran Venkatesan
Sent: Thursday, 27 March 2008 4:19 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Why is u deprecated?
The presentational elements such as b, i, s and u are deprecated as
because it can be achieved by CSS. For example, u can be achieved by
text-decoration
14 matches
Mail list logo
