> Absolutely! In natural science (specifically speaking about species names > here) Italics are the way to present the scientific name (genus species pair > or "senior synonym" like <i>Thorunna australis</i> or even just the species > or shorthand variations), not "emphasis". I think there is a good argument > for using <i> here as it isn't ambiguous in any way that I want italics. In > this case <em> is just semantically wrong and <i> simply should not be > deprecated.
Hmm. This is a difficult one. I think it could be argued that this is emphasis. In this case you are emphasising the species by displaying it in italics. <i> certainly isn't the way to go though with either argument - language is supposed to be independent of presentation, be it visual or aural or whatever. What if the biologists that be decided to change the way this was normally presented? What if it was deemed to be better to be in bold rather than italics? Your HTML would then be semantically incorrect. Hypothetical, but logical. I think it's right to completely separate meaning and presentation and I think it's right to deprecate i. ---------------- Patrick Griffiths (PTG) http://www.htmldog.com/ptg/ http://www.htmldog.com ***************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *****************************************************
