@Canageek @moonbolt @monorail @IceWolf @Felthry yes exactly (every time i have said emphasis, i have meant stress emphasis; in the HTML universe of discourse the two are taken as equivalent. following TEI, i actually consider most of the things you would use <i> for to be a form of quotation (for example, <soCalled>, <mentioned>, <foreign>, <term>, perhaps <gloss>; TEI is really a better language for this sort of thing)

and again <strong> is also not emphasis, but importance; for example warnings, minor headings, and the like; <b> is to bring attention to things without making them important

(let's not get into <u>)

but this all boils down also to the separation of style and content. i frequently don't style <em> with italics. i frequently set <b> and <strong> at different weights. although with the default browser stylesheet, confusing these two is acceptable to sighted users, it's not if you have made those sort of alterations. and of course it is never acceptable to non-visual renderers/screenreaders.

@moonbolt @monorail @IceWolf @Felthry you ever play mass effect? it's like the elcor

<calmly>Italics are an orthographic convention for conveying a variety of tones. But there is no such thing as an italic tone. People don’t think in italics.</calmly> <with-optimism>XML/HTML markup can be used to signify certain kinds of tone (for example emphasis) as well as other variances in speech (changes in voice, language, etc) and non-spoken annotations (such as when something is a proper noun). This is easy for the markup author to produce because they know which meaning they intend. It's simply a matter of saying what you mean.</with-optimism> <with-heavy-sadness>Unfortunately, this requires having a standardized set of tone-marker elements which can withstand internationalization, as well as broad education about their existence and use. HTML’s set is rather limited, and nobody writes raw HTML anymore in the age of markdown and the single-page web app.</with-heavy-sadness>

@moonbolt @monorail @IceWolf @Felthry garbage in, garbage out, as they say

nobody but the author can tell you their intended semantics. that's why it's important to teach authors good semantic markup from the getgo

@monorail @IceWolf @Felthry i am young and was not actually present for any of these conversations but it’s what i’ve gathered

@monorail @IceWolf @Felthry so i think basically it was a compromise for things like comment sections and such where the HTML is sanitized and you can’t use classes or CSS, to convey things which are semantically meaningful bold/italics but Not Emphasis or Not Importance, and i mean <b>, <i>, and <u> were always going to be maintained in an appendix for web compatibility reasons anyway, so they were like Why Not

@monorail @IceWolf @Felthry yeah i mean the HTML4 word was that you should be using a <span> and then styling with CSS

nobody did that

@monorail @IceWolf @Felthry but anyway this isn’t nefarious or trying to make old websites work, the problem is that there actually are a bunch of cases where people will italicize things for reasons other than emphasis, and then screenreaders were getting ahold of it and reading it all emphatic‐like because everyone was being a good HTML4 person and using <em>, and W3C was like Oh No What Have We Done

@monorail @IceWolf @Felthry use <cite> for book titles ;P

<i> is for foreign words and character thoughts ;P

dude if you just updated your wordpress from 2010 i wouldn’t have to do this

Show thread

you ever just follow someone through like seven domain names via archive.org

the other day okCupid asked if i would date someone with the opposite political views as me and i replied “i have dated an anarchist”

Show older
Elekk: Gameing and Other Delightful Pursuits

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!