<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 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 alternative as there is with <b> and <i>. > > Does anyone know an alternative to <xmp>? I know you can use entitiy > codes but this one saved the trouble and is now depreciated. Perhaps > they could bring those two back. > > > IceKat > > > > Joseph Ortenzi wrote: > > Very good points > > > > <b> and <i> are stylistic and <em> and <strong> are semantic. > > <u> is stylistic, but the intention of an underlined string of text > > can be expressed with any of the above, dependent on intention. > > > > I am one of those severely frustrated people who want to click > > underlined text so keep it out please... > > > > I like underline on hover as useful feedback that it is in fact, a > > link. Predefined standard colours are less important these days, but > > good design does seem to favour blue-ish for link as a convention. > > > > Joe > > > > > > On Mar 27, 2008, at 09:14, Stuart Foulstone wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> Usability. > >> Users expect link-text to be underlined. Many user studies found that > >> when you underline other text users try to click on it and get quite > >> annoyed when nothing happens (some users would click on the underlined > >> text several times before they gave up). > >> > >> Originally links were to have predefined colours that would have avoided > >> this situation, but Web Designers thought better and decided to start > >> styling their link colours as they thought fit. Even though this > >> styling > >> often does not include underlining, users still expect underlined > >> text to > >> mean links. This led to the confusion, so something had to give - it > >> was > >> <u>. > >> > >> <b> and <i> are not deprecated because there may be times when you > >> want to > >> style the text in that way but without the semantic emphasis that > >> <em> and > >> <strong> confer. > >> > >> > >> On Thu, March 27, 2008 4:28 am, Kepler Gelotte wrote: > >>> 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 > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> ******************************************************************* > >>> 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] > >> ******************************************************************* > >> > > > > ========== > > Joe Ortenzi > > [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] > ******************************************************************* > > -- []'s --------------------------------------------- Rochester Oliveira http://webbemfeita.com/ "Viva a Web-Bem-Feita" Web Designer Curitiba - PR - Brasil ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *******************************************************************
