[whatwg] contenteditable, <em> and <strong>
contact at nickshanks.com
Wed Jan 10 08:50:07 PST 2007
Having come in to this conversation half way, I'd like to give my
opinions. In the following 'default style' means in the UAs style
declarations for all documents of the language.
There should be three emphasis elements:
<em> Increases emphatic semantics by one level. *No* default
rendering style for visual media, default rendering for other media
<i> Equivalent semantics to <em>. Default rendering style for visual
media is a language-dependant alternative glyph set of the same font
family and weight (e.g. italic/курсив, oblique, カタカナ).
Default rendering style for other media not specified (at least the
same as <em>).
<b> Equivalent semantics to <em>. Default rendering style for visual
media is the same font family and glyph collection, but higher
weight. Default rendering style for other media not specified (at
least the same as <em>, perhaps louder for aural).
The <strong> element is deprecated, replaced by nested levels of <em>
or it's visual-specific variants.
Thus where visual presentation is important, <i> and <b> can be used
semantically (they are equivalent) and <em> ignored. Where visual
presentation is not important, <em> can be used without concern for
what <i> should sound like.
The basic point is that <em> has no default rendering style,
discouraging it's misuse for "i want italic text and people tell me
<i> is bad these days, so i'll use <em>".
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 2157 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the whatwg