Quote:
Originally Posted by BetterRed
That's too easy - I want Chaucer's Canterbury Tales, in the original ME dialects  |
... as played by 1960s Parisians.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chaot
Plus - there is oblique. Depending the font it can look different to italic.
|
Yep, that can be changed in CSS using "font-style: oblique;":
https://www.w3schools.com/cssref/pr_font_font-style.asp
Italics are typically cursive+slanted while Oblique is typically Roman+slanted. There aren't as many Oblique fonts though, and some programs might create "fake obliques" by distorting the Roman font.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JSWolf
Someone please show me a real world example where <i> & <em> and <b> & <strong> are different. I've seen lots of eBooks that use <em> & <strong> and they are used just the same as you would use <i> & <b>.
[... 2 seconds later ...]
But you do know that you can swap how <i> & <em> work via CSS. So technically there is no difference.
|
Are you blocking Javascript just like me? Were the counter-examples hidden behind a Javascript button? I knew I should have supported that few % that don't use it by default!
Here is a condensed list of the "real world examples" you requested:
1. Emphasized words (<em>) within Italics (<i>).
2. Book Citations (<i>)
3. Book Title (<i>) + a quotation with emphasis (<em>)
4. Math (bold/italic variables)
5. BetterRed: Foreign word/restaurant (<i>) + emphasized words (<em>)
6. Semi-Related Issue: Syntax Highlighting
Let me toss in a #7, w3 themselves:
7.
https://www.w3.org/TR/html5/text-lev...the-em-element
Quote:
The em element represents stress emphasis of its contents.
The level of stress that a particular piece of content has is given by its number of ancestor em elements.
The placement of stress emphasis changes the meaning of the sentence. The element thus forms an integral part of the content. The precise way in which stress is used in this way depends on the language.
Quote:
These examples show how changing the stress emphasis changes the meaning. First, a general statement of fact, with no stress:
<p>Cats are cute animals.</p>
By emphasizing the first word, the statement implies that the kind of animal under discussion is in question (maybe someone is asserting that dogs are cute):
<p><em>Cats</em> are cute animals.</p>
Moving the stress to the verb, one highlights that the truth of the entire sentence is in question (maybe someone is saying cats are not cute):
<p>Cats <em>are</em> cute animals.</p>
By moving it to the adjective, the exact nature of the cats is reasserted (maybe someone suggested cats were mean animals):
<p>Cats are <em>cute</em> animals.</p>
Similarly, if someone asserted that cats were vegetables, someone correcting this might emphasize the last word:
<p>Cats are cute <em>animals</em>.</p>
By emphasizing the entire sentence, it becomes clear that the speaker is fighting hard to get the point across. This kind of stress emphasis also typically affects the punctuation, hence the exclamation mark here.
<p><em>Cats are cute animals!</em></p>
Anger mixed with emphasizing the cuteness could lead to markup such as:
<p><em>Cats are <em>cute</em> animals!</em></p>
|
The em element isn't a generic "italics" element. Sometimes, text is intended to stand out from the rest of the paragraph, as if it was in a different mood or voice. For this, the i element is more appropriate.
|
You don't show examples? JSWolf wins.
You show examples? JSWolf "wins".
HTML Standards themselves? JSWolf wins!