[whatwg] De-emphasis
David Latapie
david at empyree.org
Thu Feb 8 11:53:24 PST 2007
On Thu, 8 Feb 2007 19:09:24 +0000, Nicholas Shanks wrote:
> My concern here is whether this is supposed to be an absolute or
> relative value. Would <em level="3"><em level="-1">this</em></em>
> result in an emphasis level of 2 (relative) or −1 (absolute). What
> would level="+3" mean?
• I'd say: *default is 0*, so you would end up with 2. This is both the
most intuitive and the easier to implement, calculate, IMHO.
• +3 is really like bolder or smaller: this is a relative value[1]
> <de-em>, <de-emph>, <subdue> or other new element
You meant tag ;-)
This is my belief that, the less elements the better. Negative values
for de-emphasis is easier to handle: only one element and sums go
naturally (+1-2=-1).
As I suggested earlier, the tag could be <emph> with <em> and <strong>
as transitional (and convenient) shortcuts, respectively for <emph
value="+1"> and <emph value="+2">
And those who love highlighting text coulds use <emph value="+3"> ;-)
> I don't think there's anything that would be suitable. Using <small>
> would give the wrong impression to HTML authors.
I agree wholeheartedly. It is my default solution, because there is
nothing closer (and also because it has no other use in a CSS world)
but it is still a long way from being purely semantic.
For the same reason, I use <tt> (an otherwise candidate for
deprecation) when I want to insert notes, comments...
On Thu, 8 Feb 2007, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> Is it really needed? The idea has come up now and then, granted, but it
always seemed to me like suggestions to fill some "logical hole" rather than
a real need
Well, I do use quite a lot. For instance, when sourcing my stuff, for
sidenotes and one-liners remarks...
On Thu, 8 Feb 2007, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> (I agree by the way that doing it through some level="" attribute is silly.
We already have nested elements for that purpose and similar structures.)
Please elaborate on this. On www-html, you asked me to cover nesting,
which I did (or thought I did) by introducing additions. I guess I
misunderstood what you meant by nesting. So, what it is?
David
===
(rant below)
1. (by the way, apart from compatibility/support, why still use
"font-size:bold" when there is such a thing as "font-size:bolder"? Oh I
know: no browser that I know of implement weight completely, even in
this time of synthesized fonts. Bummer
1. Ultra Light (font-weight:100)
2. Thin (font-weight:200)
3. Light (font-weight:300)
4. Normal, Roman, Regular (font-weight:400)
5. Medium (font-weight:500)
6. Bold (font-weight:600)
7. Heavy (font-weight:700)
8. Black (font-weight:800)
9. Ultra Black / Extra Black (font-weight:900)
--
</david_latapie> U+0F00
http://blog.empyree.org/en (English)
http://blog.empyree.org/fr (Français)
http://blog.empyree.org/sl (Slovensko)
More information about the whatwg
mailing list