WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Question: inlne headings

for

From: Olaf Drümmer
Date: Aug 22, 2013 7:44AM

Hi Sarah,

Am 22 Aug 2013 um 15:15 schrieb "Bourne, Sarah (ITD)" < <EMAIL REMOVED> >:

> But it's always struck me as silly to change <b> and <i> to <strong> and <em> just to make them seem semantic, without providing a way to better indicate the reason for the change in typography.

- bolding and italicising can be used without implying the text is "stronger" or more "emphasised" than other text. So from my point of view, having the option to use <em> and <strong> independent of <b> and <i> is useful

- most people when they write text do not have really any specifics in mind when making text stand out from context; as most of the time there is no specificity to an author's intent it would be misguided to require more specificity in the semantic tagging of the text; a sighted user will realise "ooh - this piece of text stands out somehow - it must be somehow more important/interesting/relevant than other text around it". The regard in which it stands out will most of the time be determined from context. By default, as being non-sighted or print-diabled does not imply lack of intelligence, a non-sighted or print-disabled user can just as well take context into account

- thus, in principle, nothing wrong with em and strong as far as I can tell….

Just my 2 cents…

Olaf