Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
Thanks Kat! I've been following this discussion and feeling like a cat at Wimbledon, following the points back and forth... For me this is the definitive match point! Now do you have an equally incisive answer for sup and sub? Andrew Maben 109b SE 4th Av Gainesville FL 32601 Cell: 352-870-6661 http://www.andrewmaben.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] In a well designed user interface, the user should not need instructions. On Jan 17, 2007, at 7:54 PM, Katrina wrote: 2) Language usage such as Latin as this is a long standing convention in print and must be retained (thus not styled via CSS). Example: i lang=laLorem ispum/i I actually come across this situation from time to time and I have ummed and ahhed over what the best thing to do is. My final answer is to place it in spans, such as span class=species lang=latinEchium plantagineum/span because: 1. The span offers flexibility: I have air-head moments where I decide these things should be italic, and bold, and in a different font, and then I decide the background should be a different colour. I can never predict what sort of air-head moments I have from year to year, and CSS allows me to cover for these moments quite easily. So I can change them to these stupid settings and then quickly change them back again :) 2. The web is essentially about semantic text. The audience reading your pages may not necessarily be human, and you need to open up your data to be available to your audience. Placing these sorts of semantic data in your code opens it up. The web is not about visual presentation, but about data. This is a really scary but powerful concept, that I believe will become even more important in the years to come. 3. All in code is evaluated by Google (a non-human audience member), and that includes the class name of the span. Your quality rating goes up, and SEOs could say more, but I believe also your listing for 'species Echium plantagineum' goes up because of the inclusion of the word 'species':) So my argument is if you find you need to present it visually different from surrounding text, ask yourself why. Why is this special, and then mark it up with spans using that speciality. Kat *** 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] ***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
Andrew I believe that Kat is correct in her approach, though would suggest that the class is applied to an em tag set, therefore will still be shown as being employed even if CSS is disabled for whatever reason. -- Regards - Rob Raising web standards : http://ele.vation.co.uk Linking in with others : http://linkedin.com/in/robkirton On 18/01/07, Andrew Maben [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks Kat! I've been following this discussion and feeling like a cat at Wimbledon, following the points back and forth... For me this is the definitive match point! Now do you have an equally incisive answer for sup and sub? Andrew Maben 109b SE 4th Av Gainesville FL 32601 Cell: 352-870-6661 http://www.andrewmaben.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] *In a well designed user interface, the user should not need ** instructions.* On Jan 17, 2007, at 7:54 PM, Katrina wrote: 2) Language usage such as Latin as this is a long standing convention in print and must be retained (thus not styled via CSS). Example: i lang=laLorem ispum/i I actually come across this situation from time to time and I have ummed and ahhed over what the best thing to do is. My final answer is to place it in spans, such as span class=species lang=latinEchium plantagineum/span because: 1. The span offers flexibility: I have air-head moments where I decide these things should be italic, and bold, and in a different font, and then I decide the background should be a different colour. I can never predict what sort of air-head moments I have from year to year, and CSS allows me to cover for these moments quite easily. So I can change them to these stupid settings and then quickly change them back again :) 2. The web is essentially about semantic text. The audience reading your pages may not necessarily be human, and you need to open up your data to be available to your audience. Placing these sorts of semantic data in your code opens it up. The web is not about visual presentation, but about data. This is a really scary but powerful concept, that I believe will become even more important in the years to come. 3. All in code is evaluated by Google (a non-human audience member), and that includes the class name of the span. Your quality rating goes up, and SEOs could say more, but I believe also your listing for 'species Echium plantagineum' goes up because of the inclusion of the word 'species':) So my argument is if you find you need to present it visually different from surrounding text, ask yourself why. Why is this special, and then mark it up with spans using that speciality. Kat *** 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] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i (and lang)
Katrina wrote: 2) Language usage such as Latin as this is a long standing convention in print and must be retained (thus not styled via CSS). Example: i lang=laLorem ispum/i I actually come across this situation from time to time and I have ummed and ahhed over what the best thing to do is. My final answer is to place it in spans, such as span class=species lang=latinEchium plantagineum/span because: 1. The span offers flexibility: I have air-head moments where I decide these things should be italic, and bold, and in a different font, and then I decide the background should be a different colour. I can never predict what sort of air-head moments I have from year to year, and CSS allows me to cover for these moments quite easily. So I can change them to these stupid settings and then quickly change them back again :) 2. The web is essentially about semantic text. The audience reading your pages may not necessarily be human, and you need to open up your data to be available to your audience. Placing these sorts of semantic data in your code opens it up. The web is not about visual presentation, but about data. This is a really scary but powerful concept, that I believe will become even more important in the years to come. 3. All in code is evaluated by Google (a non-human audience member), and that includes the class name of the span. Your quality rating goes up, and SEOs could say more, but I believe also your listing for 'species Echium plantagineum' goes up because of the inclusion of the word 'species':) So my argument is if you find you need to present it visually different from surrounding text, ask yourself why. Why is this special, and then mark it up with spans using that speciality. Kat *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** This seems interesting: http://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-css-lang#answer Bob www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
Quoting Rob Kirton [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Andrew I believe that Kat is correct in her approach, though would suggest that the class is applied to an em tag set, therefore will still be shown as being employed even if CSS is disabled for whatever reason. N...if it's not an emphasis, don't mark it up as emphasis. End of the day: if you're really after showing a visual style even if CSS is unavailable or disabled, heck, stick with presentational markup and use i then, and don't abuse em where it's not appropriate. P -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
Patrick H. Lauke wrote: End of the day: if you're really after showing a visual style even if CSS is unavailable or disabled, heck, stick with presentational markup and use i then, and don't abuse em where it's not appropriate. Call me sad, but I love these conversations. As far as I'm concerned, i and b were mistakes in the present hindsight of HTML's grand design. The idea that I'm going to be looking through your DOM and find... A body, containing a div, containing a paragraph, containing text, and... A bold? An italic? Suddenly you've destroyed the notion of self-defining abstract nodes independent of medium. i em b strong Emphasis and strong emphasis are far stronger and more independent concepts, and have that sought-after advantage of creating the same visual effects by default, without recourse to CSS. If your top priority is making your text italic no matter what, use em. However, in the case of describing the species, you aren't really emphasising it - you want to differentiate this text from the surroundings, but not as an emphasised portion of flowing prose. In fact what makes it different from the rest of the text (it describes a species) is not a fundamental difference in type of information, in fact it's very specific. So as such there is no shame in confining it to something as pedestrian as a classed and styled span. There is not really a middle ground in my mind (for this particular example) - if you are adamant about visual user agents without CSS displaying this item in italic, use i or em, but realise that you're compromising substance for style. I'm not of the opinion that that would be a cardinal sin, it just depends on how dearly you value semantics. There is this notion that higher powers will punish you. They won't. Our Lord Google who art in heaven does not, contrary to the teachings of some, analyse the names of your classes or content of your text nodes and then rate it on arbitrary strength of meaning. It takes a human to make that kind of judgment - and that person is you. Regards, Barney *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
Patrick You may have misunderstood my approach, or we may agree to differ Katrina's remark was My final answer is to place it in spans, such as span class=species lang=latinEchium plantagineum/span because: I am suggesting that an em should be used with the same class. That is if she so wishes or as convention dictates, latin emphasis can be made italic and globally changed if required later. Other forms of emphasis could be applied for non latin phrases / other purposes. I see it presentation of the semantic meaning and as such would not use a purely presentational element such as i -- Regards - Rob Raising web standards : http://ele.vation.co.uk Linking in with others : http://linkedin.com/in/robkirton On 18/01/07, Patrick H. Lauke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Quoting Rob Kirton [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Andrew I believe that Kat is correct in her approach, though would suggest that the class is applied to an em tag set, therefore will still be shown as being employed even if CSS is disabled for whatever reason. N...if it's not an emphasis, don't mark it up as emphasis. End of the day: if you're really after showing a visual style even if CSS is unavailable or disabled, heck, stick with presentational markup and use i then, and don't abuse em where it's not appropriate. P -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ *** 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] ***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
My understanding is that screen-readers will place an audible emphasis on em and strong tags, but do nothing for i and b. When i'm reading a sentence that has latin phrases such as /as nauseum/, I don't put an audible emphasis on those words, or any emphasis at all in fact. The latin words should be semantically different from the surrounding words but I don't believe em is the right tag. A span tag with an appropriate class seems the best choice to me. Similarly when i'm reading out somebody's academic qualifications i'm actually likely to put /more/ emphasis on the type of qualification than the institution from which it was obtained, this is opposite to the recognised visual representation. - Andy Rob Kirton wrote: Patrick You may have misunderstood my approach, or we may agree to differ Katrina's remark was My final answer is to place it in spans, such as span class=species lang=latinEchium plantagineum/span because: I am suggesting that an em should be used with the same class. That is if she so wishes or as convention dictates, latin emphasis can be made italic and globally changed if required later. Other forms of emphasis could be applied for non latin phrases / other purposes. I see it presentation of the semantic meaning and as such would not use a purely presentational element such as i -- Regards - Rob Raising web standards : http://ele.vation.co.uk Linking in with others : http://linkedin.com/in/robkirton http://linkedin.com/in/robkirton On 18/01/07, *Patrick H. Lauke* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Quoting Rob Kirton [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Andrew I believe that Kat is correct in her approach, though would suggest that the class is applied to an em tag set, therefore will still be shown as being employed even if CSS is disabled for whatever reason. N...if it's not an emphasis, don't mark it up as emphasis. End of the day: if you're really after showing a visual style even if CSS is unavailable or disabled, heck, stick with presentational markup and use i then, and don't abuse em where it's not appropriate. P -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk http://www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[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] ***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
Rob Kirton wrote:
I am suggesting that an em should be used with the same class. That
is if she so wishes or as convention dictates, latin emphasis can be
made italic and globally changed if required later. Other forms of
emphasis could be applied for non latin phrases / other purposes. I see
it presentation of the semantic meaning and as such would not use a
purely presentational element such as i
It just struck me that of course, small spans of foreign text in italic
is an incredibly common tradition.
If it's this specifically that we want to implement, we just put in
span:not[lang^=en]{font-style:italic}, and wait a couple of years for
it to have some kind of visible effect.
Regards,
Barney
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
On Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 02:01:49PM +, Barney Carroll wrote: Emphasis and strong emphasis are far stronger and more independent concepts, and have that sought-after advantage of creating the same visual effects by default, without recourse to CSS. If your top priority is making your text italic no matter what, use em. In my copy of lynx, em is represented by purple text, not italics. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
David Dorward wrote: On Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 02:01:49PM +, Barney Carroll wrote: Emphasis and strong emphasis are far stronger and more independent concepts, and have that sought-after advantage of creating the same visual effects by default, without recourse to CSS. If your top priority is making your text italic no matter what, use em. In my copy of lynx, em is represented by purple text, not italics. Proof that, no matter how many rules you break, no matter how far you run, some people will just never see italics on the internet. Your loss David. Hehe. Regards, Barney *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
Hello Andrew, Michael his my name am newlly Web-designer here in Nigeria. and am looking for friend around the world to help me and build me to the world taste of the corparate designing. So kindly help me with things you know it will be in a help on creating web-site. And if i want to have my own site will you help me out? Thanks On 1/18/07, Andrew Maben [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks Kat! I've been following this discussion and feeling like a cat at Wimbledon, following the points back and forth... For me this is the definitive match point! Now do you have an equally incisive answer for sup and sub? Andrew Maben 109b SE 4th Av Gainesville FL 32601 Cell: 352-870-6661 http://www.andrewmaben.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] *In a well designed user interface, the user should not need ** instructions.* On Jan 17, 2007, at 7:54 PM, Katrina wrote: 2) Language usage such as Latin as this is a long standing convention in print and must be retained (thus not styled via CSS). Example: i lang=laLorem ispum/i I actually come across this situation from time to time and I have ummed and ahhed over what the best thing to do is. My final answer is to place it in spans, such as span class=species lang=latinEchium plantagineum/span because: 1. The span offers flexibility: I have air-head moments where I decide these things should be italic, and bold, and in a different font, and then I decide the background should be a different colour. I can never predict what sort of air-head moments I have from year to year, and CSS allows me to cover for these moments quite easily. So I can change them to these stupid settings and then quickly change them back again :) 2. The web is essentially about semantic text. The audience reading your pages may not necessarily be human, and you need to open up your data to be available to your audience. Placing these sorts of semantic data in your code opens it up. The web is not about visual presentation, but about data. This is a really scary but powerful concept, that I believe will become even more important in the years to come. 3. All in code is evaluated by Google (a non-human audience member), and that includes the class name of the span. Your quality rating goes up, and SEOs could say more, but I believe also your listing for 'species Echium plantagineum' goes up because of the inclusion of the word 'species':) So my argument is if you find you need to present it visually different from surrounding text, ask yourself why. Why is this special, and then mark it up with spans using that speciality. Kat *** 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] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
Hello Michael, am also Michael and i am newlly Web-designer graduate here in Nigeria. and am looking for friend around the world to help me and build me to the world taste of the corparate designing. So kindly help me with things you know it will be in a help on creating web-site. And if i want to have my own site will you help me out? Thanks On 1/17/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Original Message- From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of russ - maxdesign Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 1:10 PM To: Web Standards Group Subject: Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i Might be worth looking at the work on the Microformats site for more detailed citation markup http://microformats.org/wiki/cite http://microformats.org/wiki/citation-examples http://microformats.org/wiki/citation-examples#List_of_all_pr operties http://microformats.org/wiki/citation-examples-markup#Breakdo wn_of_Citation _Elements HTH Russ No, that doesn't really help - their candidate list of attributes is ginormous! Doesn't look like they are very close to completion, so right now it is a choice between inventing a micro-format and hoping that it is compatible, or just doing it the easy (visual only) way. Since the _only_ advantage of a micro-format comes from standardisation, going it alone does not seem very useful. Mike *** 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] ***
RE: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
Hi Michael, This list is good enough for you to learn basic and extensive problem in web designing. If you have a problem just put it on and you will receive enough answers to you're your problem. _ From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Adesanwo Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 5:24 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i Hello Andrew, Michael his my name am newlly Web-designer here in Nigeria. and am looking for friend around the world to help me and build me to the world taste of the corparate designing. So kindly help me with things you know it will be in a help on creating web-site. And if i want to have my own site will you help me out? Thanks On 1/18/07, Andrew Maben [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks Kat! I've been following this discussion and feeling like a cat at Wimbledon, following the points back and forth... For me this is the definitive match point! Now do you have an equally incisive answer for sup and sub? Andrew Maben 109b SE 4th Av Gainesville FL 32601 Cell: 352-870-6661 http://www.andrewmaben.com/ http://www.andrewmaben.com mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] In a well designed user interface, the user should not need instructions. On Jan 17, 2007, at 7:54 PM, Katrina wrote: 2) Language usage such as Latin as this is a long standing convention in print and must be retained (thus not styled via CSS). Example: i lang=laLorem ispum/i I actually come across this situation from time to time and I have ummed and ahhed over what the best thing to do is. My final answer is to place it in spans, such as span class=species lang=latinEchium plantagineum/span because: 1. The span offers flexibility: I have air-head moments where I decide these things should be italic, and bold, and in a different font, and then I decide the background should be a different colour. I can never predict what sort of air-head moments I have from year to year, and CSS allows me to cover for these moments quite easily. So I can change them to these stupid settings and then quickly change them back again :) 2. The web is essentially about semantic text. The audience reading your pages may not necessarily be human, and you need to open up your data to be available to your audience. Placing these sorts of semantic data in your code opens it up. The web is not about visual presentation, but about data. This is a really scary but powerful concept, that I believe will become even more important in the years to come. 3. All in code is evaluated by Google (a non-human audience member), and that includes the class name of the span. Your quality rating goes up, and SEOs could say more, but I believe also your listing for 'species Echium plantagineum' goes up because of the inclusion of the word 'species':) So my argument is if you find you need to present it visually different from surrounding text, ask yourself why. Why is this special, and then mark it up with spans using that speciality. Kat *** 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] *** *** 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] ***
RE: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
cite is a single element. A full bibliographic reference will typically contain a selection from: Article name Journal name Authors name(s) Editors name(s) Date of publication and probably a few other things. As you can see, each item needs to be kept distinct from each other, so a single container is not enough. A suitable micro-format would be great, but the point is that regardless of what non-sighted users require, a visual user requires a visual distinction. Clearly each item is of fairly equal importance, so neither em or strong is appropriate, semantically speaking. Mike -Original Message- From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick H. Lauke Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2007 8:35 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A very similar example would be bibliographic citations What's wrong with cite then? P -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
Might be worth looking at the work on the Microformats site for more detailed citation markup http://microformats.org/wiki/cite http://microformats.org/wiki/citation-examples http://microformats.org/wiki/citation-examples#List_of_all_properties http://microformats.org/wiki/citation-examples-markup#Breakdown_of_Citation _Elements HTH Russ on 17/1/07 11:47 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at wrote: cite is a single element. A full bibliographic reference will typically contain a selection from: Article name Journal name Authors name(s) Editors name(s) Date of publication and probably a few other things. As you can see, each item needs to be kept distinct from each other, so a single container is not enough. A suitable micro-format would be great, but the point is that regardless of what non-sighted users require, a visual user requires a visual distinction. Clearly each item is of fairly equal importance, so neither em or strong is appropriate, semantically speaking. Mike *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]: cite is a single element. A full bibliographic reference will typically contain a selection from: Article name Journal name Authors name(s) Editors name(s) Date of publication and probably a few other things. As you can see, each item needs to be kept distinct from each other, so a single container is not enough. Not necessarily. HTML is a very semantically poor language, which of course doesn't have any granular elements that can distinguish content down to that level. All of that would probably fall under a single cite. If you *do* feel that, even though there are no adequate elements to distinguish these separate bits of the citation, they should be physically separated in the markup, you could still provide them as a neutral series of spans. A suitable micro-format would be great, but the point is that regardless of what non-sighted users require, a visual user requires a visual distinction. Which can then be provided by styling the separate spans. Unless under visual user you also mean visual user in a text-only or otherwise CSS incapable browser, which again would bring us back to the core problem of this argument. P -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
-Original Message- From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick H. Lauke Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 2:38 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i A suitable micro-format would be great, but the point is that regardless of what non-sighted users require, a visual user requires a visual distinction. Which can then be provided by styling the separate spans. Unless under visual user you also mean visual user in a text-only or otherwise CSS incapable browser, which again would bring us back to the core problem of this argument. P -- I quite agree - I was merely trying to refute the argument that em and strong _entirely_ replaced i and b Mike *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
-Original Message- From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of russ - maxdesign Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 1:10 PM To: Web Standards Group Subject: Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i Might be worth looking at the work on the Microformats site for more detailed citation markup http://microformats.org/wiki/cite http://microformats.org/wiki/citation-examples http://microformats.org/wiki/citation-examples#List_of_all_pr operties http://microformats.org/wiki/citation-examples-markup#Breakdo wn_of_Citation _Elements HTH Russ No, that doesn't really help - their candidate list of attributes is ginormous! Doesn't look like they are very close to completion, so right now it is a choice between inventing a micro-format and hoping that it is compatible, or just doing it the easy (visual only) way. Since the _only_ advantage of a micro-format comes from standardisation, going it alone does not seem very useful. Mike *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
2) Language usage such as Latin as this is a long standing convention in print and must be retained (thus not styled via CSS). Example: i lang=laLorem ispum/i I actually come across this situation from time to time and I have ummed and ahhed over what the best thing to do is. My final answer is to place it in spans, such as span class=species lang=latinEchium plantagineum/span because: 1. The span offers flexibility: I have air-head moments where I decide these things should be italic, and bold, and in a different font, and then I decide the background should be a different colour. I can never predict what sort of air-head moments I have from year to year, and CSS allows me to cover for these moments quite easily. So I can change them to these stupid settings and then quickly change them back again :) 2. The web is essentially about semantic text. The audience reading your pages may not necessarily be human, and you need to open up your data to be available to your audience. Placing these sorts of semantic data in your code opens it up. The web is not about visual presentation, but about data. This is a really scary but powerful concept, that I believe will become even more important in the years to come. 3. All in code is evaluated by Google (a non-human audience member), and that includes the class name of the span. Your quality rating goes up, and SEOs could say more, but I believe also your listing for 'species Echium plantagineum' goes up because of the inclusion of the word 'species':) So my argument is if you find you need to present it visually different from surrounding text, ask yourself why. Why is this special, and then mark it up with spans using that speciality. Kat *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
The only situation I can think of when there is an established visual standard for certain things that don't really have a semantic emphasis. I use a simple test: does the meaning conveyed need to remain if CSS is disabled? If yes, then stick with em and strong. The only place I can think of where I used i was reproducing a text-only logo (client wanted the general effect to remain no matter what). Half the word was italicised, for no real reason. It was all pretty dubious. Another way to think of it is that I don't think visual conventions were trying to say the important thing for you to know is that this bit of text was thicker than the other bit, for no reason. Generally they were saying we've used bold to show that this bit of text is significant in some way. In general, I think people mistake debates over i/b vs em/strong as being about those specific tags. They are really just suitable examples to explain the broader concept of semantics - but the downside is many people think standards advocates really really care about strong and em in particular. FWIW. IMHO. ..and other acronyms. cheers, Ben -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
A very similar example would be bibliographic citations, though I believe there are as many variations in common use as it is possible to have! Mike -Original Message- From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrew Ingram Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2007 4:56 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i I know these tags are only supposed to be used for presentational rather than semantic emphasis, but i've been struggling to come up with examples of when they would be used. The only situation I can think of when there is an established visual standard for certain things that don't really have a semantic emphasis. For example, when listing somebody's academic qualifications the standard is to display the institution in italics but i'd say that it's not appropriate to use em. A. Ingram, MEng iWarw/i Does anyone know of any other legitimate uses of these tags? - Andrew Ingram *** 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] ***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
I know these tags are only supposed to be used for presentational rather than semantic emphasis, but i've been struggling to come up with examples of when they would be used. Same here. The only situation I can think of when there is an established visual standard for certain things that don't really have a semantic emphasis. My take is that if something is presented differently there must be a reason for that. For example, when listing somebody's academic qualifications the standard is to display the institution in italics but i'd say that it's not appropriate to use em. I'd use span clas=institution.../span. A. Ingram, MEng iWarw/i Does anyone know of any other legitimate uses of these tags? Well, ok, maybe i class=institutionWarw/i. It has some semantics brought in with class and it stays in italics even with CSS off. And it is shorter. Still, I doubt I'll ever use b or i. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
Hello Andrew, Does anyone know of any other legitimate uses of these tags? For the life of me I cannot think of one legitimate use for the b element. If it's bold then the reason is probably strong emphasis thus strong should be used. Otherwise it should be made bold in the CSS. For the i element, though, I can think of a couple of legitimate uses: 1) To convey thought. Thought as in unspoken dialog should be italicized. This should be on the page, not CSS-styled so as to retain at least visual meaning. Example: iThat's a good idea/i, he thought to himself. 2) Language usage such as Latin as this is a long standing convention in print and must be retained (thus not styled via CSS). Example: i lang=laLorem ispum/i That's my thinking on the matter. Hope it helps. Respectfully, Mike Cherim http://green-beast.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
At 1/16/2007 08:55 AM, Andrew Ingram wrote: I know these tags are only supposed to be used for presentational rather than semantic emphasis, but i've been struggling to come up with examples of when they would be used. The only situation I can think of when there is an established visual standard for certain things that don't really have a semantic emphasis. For example, when listing somebody's academic qualifications the standard is to display the institution in italics but i'd say that it's not appropriate to use em. A. Ingram, MEng iWarw/i Does anyone know of any other legitimate uses of these tags? Andrew, I differ with your assertion that the institution names in your documents don't have semantic emphasis. It's precisely because of the semantic singularity of institution names that leads you to italicize them in the first place. A strong argument against using such presentational elements as i and u in markup is that thenceforth the markup, not the stylesheet, determines exactly how the information will be presented; you've lost some of the beauty and functionality of that separation we strive for, but without gaining anything significant from the sacrifice. When you or your organization eventually changes this decision of how institution names (and potentially other terms) will be presented in the websites you've marked up, the then-current webmeisters will be faced with three unhappy choices: - Replace selected i tags in the markup. That's stupid manual work for overly qualified workers, resisted and economically prohibitive. If you've used i for other terms in addition to institutions, a global replacement won't likely suffice. - Not change the styling because it's too much work, sacrificing presentational goals that would otherwise be easy to meet. - Apply non-italic styling to the italic tag. This essentially means using the i tag to mean institution which might not be practical if by then you've gone over to the dark side and have used i to mark up other types of text that you wish (today) to be italicized. I feel uncomfortable with that kind of semantic re-purposing of HTML because it separates your markup from the public body of convention that gives our markup meaning in the first place. Until we mark up our documents in pure XML I believe the smarter course is something along the lines of span class=institution. That's future-friendly -- only does it make for flexible styling but also it indicates the semantic purpose of the text fragments in question, making your documents more machine-readable. I find the argument that classed spans are 'too heavy' to be specious. Disk space and bandwidth continue to grow and get cheaper; let's not sacrifice the meaning of our documents to either the almighty penny or the almighty millisecond. Regards, Paul __ Juniper Webcraft Ltd. http://juniperwebcraft.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
I do not agree. The VISUAL impact or VISUAL meaning should be added by CSS. If you need italicized text, you´ll be probally trying to add some emphasis or differentiation in the page. Why should we hide this from our NON-VISUAL friends? Legitimate i , it´s the same of legitimate font. It´s the presentation over meaning. :D Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote: Hello Andrew, Does anyone know of any other legitimate uses of these tags? For the life of me I cannot think of one legitimate use for the b element. If it's bold then the reason is probably strong emphasis thus strong should be used. Otherwise it should be made bold in the CSS. For the i element, though, I can think of a couple of legitimate uses: 1) To convey thought. Thought as in unspoken dialog should be italicized. This should be on the page, not CSS-styled so as to retain at least visual meaning. Example: iThat's a good idea/i, he thought to himself. 2) Language usage such as Latin as this is a long standing convention in print and must be retained (thus not styled via CSS). Example: i lang=laLorem ispum/i That's my thinking on the matter. Hope it helps. Respectfully, Mike Cherim http://green-beast.com/ *** 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] ***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote: Hello Andrew, Does anyone know of any other legitimate uses of these tags? For the life of me I cannot think of one legitimate use for the b element. If it's bold then the reason is probably strong emphasis thus strong should be used. Otherwise it should be made bold in the CSS. For the i element, though, I can think of a couple of legitimate uses: 1) To convey thought. Thought as in unspoken dialog should be italicized. This should be on the page, not CSS-styled so as to retain at least visual meaning. Example: iThat's a good idea/i, he thought to himself. 2) Language usage such as Latin as this is a long standing convention in print and must be retained (thus not styled via CSS). Example: i lang=laLorem ispum/i That's my thinking on the matter. Hope it helps. Respectfully, Mike Cherim http://green-beast.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** So, in your view, is it OK to write: One bedroom has an em lang=fren-suite/em bathroom and a single bed with . . . ?? Bob *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
Just one more thing: For language purposes, there is always the lang attribute. It can be added to a meaningless element, like span. The W3C recommends this kind of approach. Ok, ok. So, the browsers don´t understand that yet. But it´s always better to use EM over I and STRONG over B. -- Love all. Trust a few. Do wrong to none. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
Hello Raphael, Just because something is visual doesn't mean that it doesn't have meaning. I have long been a member of the scientific community and I write Latin arthropod binomials. This is a visual thing, but it's something I want -- and feel necessary -- to convey whether CSS is supported or not. This is a long time pre-web practice. It's not emphatic, but it does have meaning, albeit visual meaning, and CSS would suffice if it was supported by all visual users. The i of course has no meaning to non-visual users (that's where the language attribute has the most power in this example), but to all visual users this is important. This would include text browsers, conventional browsers without CSS support, and others if they exist. I'm all for the proper separation, but being absolute doesn't necessarily mean it's correct. There is a place for everything. So I guess I will maintain my position that the two uses I outlined are in my opinion legitimate. I suspect the W3C would agree with this else they'd deprecate these elements, but they haven't. In light of this I imagine there is also a legitimate use for the bold element though for the life of me I cannot imagine what it would be. Respectfully, Mike Cherim - Original Message - From: Raphael Martins [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2007 1:51 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i I do not agree. The VISUAL impact or VISUAL meaning should be added by CSS. If you need italicized text, you´ll be probally trying to add some emphasis or differentiation in the page. Why should we hide this from our NON-VISUAL friends? Legitimate i , it´s the same of legitimate font. It´s the presentation over meaning. :D Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote: Hello Andrew, Does anyone know of any other legitimate uses of these tags? For the life of me I cannot think of one legitimate use for the b element. If it's bold then the reason is probably strong emphasis thus strong should be used. Otherwise it should be made bold in the CSS. For the i element, though, I can think of a couple of legitimate uses: 1) To convey thought. Thought as in unspoken dialog should be italicized. This should be on the page, not CSS-styled so as to retain at least visual meaning. Example: iThat's a good idea/i, he thought to himself. 2) Language usage such as Latin as this is a long standing convention in print and must be retained (thus not styled via CSS). Example: i lang=laLorem ispum/i That's my thinking on the matter. Hope it helps. Respectfully, Mike Cherim http://green-beast.com/ *** 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] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
Hello Bob, So, in your view, is it OK to write: One bedroom has an em lang=fren-suite/em bathroom and a single bed with . . . I'm not sure if italicizing something like en suite is an accepted practice or a conventional method as it is with Latin binomials. I'm guessing it is not. I *think* it is different with scientific names but I'm not sure. Mike - Original Message - From: Designer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2007 2:01 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote: Hello Andrew, Does anyone know of any other legitimate uses of these tags? For the life of me I cannot think of one legitimate use for the b element. If it's bold then the reason is probably strong emphasis thus strong should be used. Otherwise it should be made bold in the CSS. For the i element, though, I can think of a couple of legitimate uses: 1) To convey thought. Thought as in unspoken dialog should be italicized. This should be on the page, not CSS-styled so as to retain at least visual meaning. Example: iThat's a good idea/i, he thought to himself. 2) Language usage such as Latin as this is a long standing convention in print and must be retained (thus not styled via CSS). Example: i lang=laLorem ispum/i That's my thinking on the matter. Hope it helps. Respectfully, Mike Cherim http://green-beast.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** So, in your view, is it OK to write: One bedroom has an em lang=fren-suite/em bathroom and a single bed with . . . ?? Bob *** 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] ***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
Raphael Martins wrote: For language purposes, there is always the lang attribute. It can be added to a meaningless element, like span. Absoluetly. I agree. This is also a WCAG requirement. http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT-TECHS/#tech-identify-changes But it´s always better to use EM over I and STRONG over B. Absolutely again, if it is to have empahtic meaning, of course. Mike *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A very similar example would be bibliographic citations What's wrong with cite then? P -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote: Just because something is visual doesn't mean that it doesn't have meaning. Of course. But HTML has far more sophisticated ways to convey meaning behind the scenes than printed material, which intrinsically has to convey the extra meaning in a visual way. What came first? The extra meaning, or the way print designers / typesetters / etc had to implement it? I have long been a member of the scientific community and I write Latin arthropod binomials. This is a visual thing, but it's something I want -- and feel necessary -- to convey whether CSS is supported or not. And using a span with appropriate class (or similar) still carries this meaning...it's just that it doesn't, by default, present it *visually*, which should maybe not be expected in situations where CSS is off/not supported. I suspect the W3C would agree with this else they'd deprecate these elements, but they haven't. They also haven't deprecated sub/sup, but that's the same issue there. Basically, to preserve backwards compatibility, they can't deprecate them, imho, because there's no other markup element from the old set that can mark up the various meanings which, visually, translate to sub and sup. But hey, it's just the idealist in me talking... P -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
Andrew Ingram wrote: I know these tags are only supposed to be used for presentational rather than semantic emphasis, but i've been struggling to come up with examples of when they would be used. The recently written definitions of b and i in HTML5 should be of some use to you. http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#the-i http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#the-b -- Lachlan Hunt http://lachy.id.au/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
