[whatwg] Semantic markup for buzzwords
This is a proposal for semantic markup in HTML5. Problem statement: Modern web pages, especially those written for marketing purposes, often include so-called buzzwords, or trend-leveraging verbal tokens. Markup for them is needed both to achieve distinct visual rendering and to emphasize them for search engines. Despite the need for specialized semantic markup, currently no such markup exists, and authors use ad-hoc presentational markup for buzzwords. Proposed solution: Redefine the existing deprecated presentational element B to mean a buzzword. Keep existing default style (font-weight: bold) associated with it. With such formatting, buzzwords will visually stand out on the page, allowing the reader, such as a prospective VC evaluating an IT project proposal, to briefly skim through a web page picking out only buzzwords. Advantages: * The solution is backward compatible with existing browsers which already implement distinct rendering for B. * The practice of using B to mark up buzzwords is already widely adopted. * Some search engines rank words marked up with B higher than the rest of the text. * B is a nice single-letter tag name that would be sad to waste as an obsolete element. -- Alexey Feldgendler [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ICQ: 115226275] http://my.opera.com/feldgendler/
Re: [whatwg] Semantic markup for buzzwords
On Tue, 01 Apr 2008 18:08:20 +0200, Maciej Stachowiak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I believe the current definition of the B element allows for such use: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#the-b The b element represents a span of text to be stylistically offset from the normal prose without conveying any extra importance, such as key words in a document abstract, product names in a review, or other spans of text whose typical typographic presentation is boldened. This describes b as a presentational element, but my proposal makes it semantic. On Tue, 01 Apr 2008 18:05:44 +0200, Brian Kardell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can you please explain precisely how this would differ from strong which really should work exactly as you described? Is it really mostly just the fact that some search engines don't accurately respect strong as being the essential equivalent of b? If so, then I would like to suggest that this might not be the best solution, and that suggesting some alternative tag for semantics isn't probably going to help solve this problem in any meaningful way since the recommendations that we have around now have been available for search engines to figure out and implement for longer than some of the engines themselves. Could you not achieve what you are looking for with meta tags or some alternative means? Using a different tag name would suffer from the chicken-and-egg probem, and the advantage of b is that it's already widely used for exactly the purpose proposed. Just my 2 cents for what they are worth. Also - it is very possible that I don't understand, if so could you expand? Taking into account the very special date on which this discussion is happening should clarify matters. -- Alexey Feldgendler [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ICQ: 115226275] http://my.opera.com/feldgendler/
Re: [whatwg] Semantic markup for buzzwords
On 01/04/2008, Alexey Feldgendler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 01 Apr 2008 18:08:20 +0200, Maciej Stachowiak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just my 2 cents for what they are worth. Also - it is very possible that I don't understand, if so could you expand? Taking into account the very special date on which this discussion is happening should clarify matters. I thought that was the one advocating H.264. - d.
Re: [whatwg] Semantic markup for buzzwords
On Apr 1, 2008, at 2:48 AM, Alexey Feldgendler wrote: This is a proposal for semantic markup in HTML5. Problem statement: Modern web pages, especially those written for marketing purposes, often include so-called buzzwords, or trend-leveraging verbal tokens. Markup for them is needed both to achieve distinct visual rendering and to emphasize them for search engines. Despite the need for specialized semantic markup, currently no such markup exists, and authors use ad-hoc presentational markup for buzzwords. Proposed solution: Redefine the existing deprecated presentational element B to mean a buzzword. Keep existing default style (font-weight: bold) associated with it. With such formatting, buzzwords will visually stand out on the page, allowing the reader, such as a prospective VC evaluating an IT project proposal, to briefly skim through a web page picking out only buzzwords. Advantages: * The solution is backward compatible with existing browsers which already implement distinct rendering for B. * The practice of using B to mark up buzzwords is already widely adopted. * Some search engines rank words marked up with B higher than the rest of the text. * B is a nice single-letter tag name that would be sad to waste as an obsolete element. I believe the current definition of the B element allows for such use: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#the-b The b element represents a span of text to be stylistically offset from the normal prose without conveying any extra importance, such as key words in a document abstract, product names in a review, or other spans of text whose typical typographic presentation is boldened. Regards, Maciej
