Just FYI, I think the W3C has finally deprecated EM and STRONG. I agree with Ekk: it makes to do in 2 or 6 characters what you can do in 1. :)
*much huggings* Good day good. Quiet day good. Productive day even better. :) (Don't have time to read everything, waugh; back to interface-construction...)
What am I supposed to use instead of <em> and <strong>? I thought the point of those was to say that you wanted something emphasized in a way that allowed the browser to choose the representation of it depending on the capabilities of the display device... The one-byte tags that come to mind are <b>, <u>, and <i>, each of which I thought was deprecated previously (but which I use anyhow when I specifically want a particular one -- e.g. italics for a book title, or underline for a title if the surrounding text is already in italics).
Did I misunderstand, or am I just behind and the winds changed when I wasn't looking?
EM and STRONG were great ideas that never took off -- Ekk & I think they may have originated as IE-only tags. I and B really are more efficient (less page weight), and now that the browser field has been pretty much narrowed to IE, NS, and Opera, eh no worries. The U tag, btw, is a bad idea; people get confused and think that the underlined text is a link. And, no joke, I have seen people compulsively clicking on underlined text, because they're sure they must be missing the link. I don't think I, B, or U were ever deprecated; there may've been a suggestion of it, but it never made it into a final spec.
*shudders and twitches at memories of village idiots*
Rar. :)
*much huggings* Good day good. Quiet day good. Productive day even better. :) (Don't have time to read everything, waugh; back to interface-construction...)
Re: Rar. :)
Did I misunderstand, or am I just behind and the winds changed when I wasn't looking?
Re: Rar. :)
*shudders and twitches at memories of village idiots*