<i>, <em> or <span> for italics ?

[DaleDe]

em could also be upper case if some situations.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by DaleDe

em could also be upper case if some situations.

As I've previously mentioned, I saw one example where <em> underlined the text.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by Tex2002ans

If it exists in Unicode, Android, billions of people, I'm for it. Who's with me‽

PS. A few months back I actually searched the "middle finger" character on the entire MobileRead... I was the only one who ever used one. So just because a character's "never been seen", doesn't mean it shouldn't be used!

Oh, horse pucky. NOBODY will use the Interrobang, if it's not properly in place with fonts, for print. I'm certainly not going to slap some Unicode Interrobang into a nicely-typeset document. And if it ain't in print, that matters. (And fwiw, that character is very busy and icky. I kinda, maybe, like the idea, but from my perspective, it's up there with Dothraki. )

Just b/c we're on Mobileread doesn't mean we can all pretend that the entire world is eBooks and digital fonts.

Hitch

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Hitch

Oh, horse pucky. NOBODY will use the Interrobang, if it's not properly in place with fonts, for print. I'm certainly not going to slap some Unicode Interrobang into a nicely-typeset document. And if it ain't in print, that matters. (And fwiw, that character is very busy and icky. I kinda, maybe, like the idea, but from my perspective, it's up there with Dothraki. )

Just b/c we're on Mobileread doesn't mean we can all pretend that the entire world is eBooks and digital fonts.

Hitch

Interrobang looks like a cockup where two characters overwrote each other. It's sloppy, ugly, and there is no need for it.

[hobnail]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Interrobang looks like a cockup where two characters overwrote each other. It's sloppy, ugly, and there is no need for it.

Likewise for the ampersand.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Jellby

Jon, you're missing that there is no comma in the selector. It says:

i em

that is for every <em> inside an <i>. It is not:

i, em

which seems to be what you are bashing at.

Thank you for pointing that out. I did miss that there is no comma.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Interrobang looks like a cockup where two characters overwrote each other. It's sloppy, ugly, and there is no need for it.

LOL, he's got ya there, lads!

Originally Posted by hobnail

Likewise for the ampersand.

See, now, I keep stumbling over fonts that have downright lovely ampersands, or at least, they give you an optional extra foofy ampersand glyph. For me, that's like...buried treasure. It's a joy to find a lovely ampersand.

Jesus I gotta get out more. I can't believe that I just wrote that and worse, meant it.

Hitch

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by hobnail

Likewise for the ampersand.

Interesting history of the ampersand. But these days, the modern ampersand looks nothing like a ligature of E & T.

[Tex2002ans]

Originally Posted by Turtle91

To differentiate an emphasized word within other words that are already italicized/emphasized..

Exactly.

Happens quite often in Non-Fiction when dealing with emphasized words or book titles within italics text.

If you visually turned the whole thing italics... you would lose the original, so you flip-flop. If the original had Normal text + Italics italics, you flip to Italics/Normal.

Emphasis in Poetry

Quite often poetry/lyrics are visually displayed in all italics. But what if the original had emphasis?

Original:

- Poetry, oh poetry, where are you?

Your book, where all poetry is displayed in italics:

- Poetry, oh poetry, where are you?

Emphasis in Book Titles

As one example, a famous article/book is called "The Not So Wild, Wild West". Actual italics text in the title.

What happens when you want to cite this thing?

Book Titles must be italics in most Style Guides, so you flip-flop the italic parts.

Original Title:

- The Not So Wild, Wild West

Cited:

- The Not So Wild, Wild West

HTML:

<i>The <em>Not So</em> Wild, Wild West</i>

Originally Posted by Hitch

Oh, horse pucky. NOBODY will use the Interrobang, if it's not properly in place with fonts, for print. I'm certainly not going to slap some Unicode Interrobang into a nicely-typeset document. And if it ain't in print, that matters.

🖕 that!

Originally Posted by Hitch

(And fwiw, that character is very busy and icky. I kinda, maybe, like the idea, but from my perspective, it's up there with Dothraki. )

Agree. With most fonts it looks awful + too dark (doesn't match grayness of surrounding text)... and it does look a little like spaghetti at low font sizes.

But there are fonts that show the !+? in a V-shape:

https://shadycharacters.co.uk/2016/0...of-characters/

Taking a look through my fonts in BabelMap, looks like these also have that variant:

- Carlito
- Lato

And many have the shorter/longer !, which looks a little less crowded.

Originally Posted by Hitch

Just b/c we're on Mobileread doesn't mean we can all pretend that the entire world is eBooks and digital fonts.

You know you love it! Just admit it!

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Interesting history of the ampersand. But these days, the modern ampersand looks nothing like a ligature of E & T.

Also see:

https://shadycharacters.co.uk/2011/0...d-part-1-of-2/
https://shadycharacters.co.uk/2011/0...d-part-2-of-2/
http://shadycharacters.co.uk/series/the-ampersand/

And the octothorpe (#) morphed from "lb" with a line through it. # was pretty much a dead character too, but grew in the 1960/1970s because it was shoved on telephone keypads, then usage blew into the stratosphere with Twitter.

https://shadycharacters.co.uk/2011/0...e-part-1-of-2/

Side Note: And the lb+bar is in Unicode too, ℔ (U+2114) "L B BAR SYMBOL". Now that's a rarely used character!

[Quoth]

In a proper font for Irish, the i has no dot, and the & looks like a cross between 7 and the continental 1 (that has no pedestal but a longer nose). It's very logical for i to have no dot in any language using í or ì. Irish scribes invented lower case as method more suited to handwriting than ROMAN LETTERING. Actual old Irish fonts are a little hard for people not familiar, but easier on the eye than the German Gothic Black Letter stuff.
The !, ? #, @, /, %, =, *, (, ) and & were on typewriters and also on Teleprinters / Telex (from late 1928 onwards). I'm not sure which punctuation the Victorian typewriters had.
Golfballs and later Daisywheels and Thimbles I think increased the characters to 96.

Printers (engraving long before Moveable Type in Europe) obviously were not limited, but in England type was imported. There was no þ, which was later transliterated as Th. So the letter Y was pressed into service. Ye Shop is really The Shop.

Changes in orthography are very slow. Old Wordstar never had extended ASCII, (96 x 2 = 192 printable) but you could embed backspaces to overprint ?! or L and - as a rubbish £ symbol.

I can't remember if teletypes had | \ ¬ ¦ ^ { } or ~. I think they did have [ ] < >


Just saying.

[najgori]

Originally Posted by Tex2002ans

There was a little speedbump there in HTML4 where they deprecated <i>+<b>, but I think they made a step back in the right direction in HTML5.

I really liked <center> tag. It was so simple...
It's still dead.

[Quoth]

They spelled it wrong

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by Quoth

They spelled it wrong

MWAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Hitch

[DaleDe]

Originally Posted by hobnail

Likewise for the ampersand.

Fascinating history.

Dale

[Tex2002ans]

Originally Posted by Quoth

In a proper font for Irish, the i has no dot, and the & looks like a cross between 7 and the continental 1 (that has no pedestal but a longer nose).

Just ran across this one a few weeks ago: "dotted b" and "dotted d". Only used in Irish:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_orthography

Initially found out about it in a bug in Source Code Pro:

https://github.com/adobe-fonts/sourc...pro/issues/205

And "dotless i" and "dotted capital I" in Turkish... oh boy, does that one open up a huge can of worms. It's the source of many bugs in programs (capitalization, comparing strings, sorting, etc.):

https://haacked.com/archive/2012/07/...uld-care.aspx/