3770Re: [NH] vs. , vs.
- Feb 21, 2003
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Greg Chapman" <greg@e...> wrote:
> I'm with you all the way on this! And you miss the very obvious
> the W3C are very hooked into non-visual browsers, where italic also has
> absolutely no meaning.
> Whilst, I must confess, I only use visual browsers and only expect
> to do so, and so, in the real world, I do tend to use <I> tags, I do
> completely accept the thrust of the W3C, that style and structure
no, dude, you both missed my point -- which is: there is nothing
"structural" about <em> and <strong>. both are just as presentational
as <i> and <b>; only difference is, the rendering of <em> and <strong>
is not declared by the html standard, but was only conventionally
treated as italics and bold-weight by the browsers.
anyway, this is offtopic so I'll shut up.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>