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

[Jellby]

My guess is nothing (although that may depend on which software), it should just be rendered as a long pause. I don't think reading software should say anything when it comes to a comma or full stop either...

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Jellby

My guess is nothing (although that may depend on which software), it should just be rendered as a long pause. I don't think reading software should say anything when it comes to a comma or full stop either...

That does sound logical to have a longer pause.

[bookman156]

I recently downloaded the free NVDA screen reader. I plan to see what that does with an hr tag when I eventually get round to it.

https://www.nvaccess.org/download/

[bookman156]

Nobody has given a proper explanation of what <em> and <strong> are vs <i> and <b>.

On that issue, I always use em and strong for everything, since I remember when i and b were deprecated on the web. The fact that they've brought them back doesn't fill me with confidence.

While I understand there may be some subtle difference between em and i, it has to be admitted that even to italicise a book title is a form of emphasis. In any case, we should be using the cite tag for things like that, not that I ever do. The bottom line is that italic emphasises. I'm not going to sit there and sort out various gradations of difference in that emphasis when those who make the rules can't even leave old tags in the bin.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by bookman156

On that issue, I always use em and strong for everything, since I remember when i and b were deprecated on the web. The fact that they've brought them back doesn't fill me with confidence.

While I understand there may be some subtle difference between em and i, it has to be admitted that even to italicise a book title is a form of emphasis. In any case, we should be using the cite tag for things like that, not that I ever do. The bottom line is that italic emphasises. I'm not going to sit there and sort out various gradations of difference in that emphasis when those who make the rules can't even leave old tags in the bin.

<em> and <strong> just take up more space in the eBook then <i> and <b>. Plus, I prefer to see <i> & <b> and it's neater code. Programs reading a book won't be doing anything different with <em> and <strong> then <i> and <b>.

[bookman156]

When I write say The Lancet in text and italicise it with em (when I should be using cite) I don't mean anyone to put on a fancy voice when reading it but I do intend to emphasise it by making it stand out of the text at a glance, and also to conform with publishing convention. If we used the cite tag and specified it in the CSS as italic it would probably be better and take care of all book and journal/magazine titles, and the rest would probably be pure emphasis of words in text.

[bookman156]

<em> and <strong> just take up more space in the eBook then <i> and <b>.

That's not really an argument. Words take up even more room and most books could do with having those trimmed.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by bookman156

When I write say The Lancet in text and italicise it with em (when I should be using cite) I don't mean anyone to put on a fancy voice when reading it but I do intend to emphasise it by making it stand out of the text at a glance, and also to conform with publishing convention. If we used the cite tag and specified it in the CSS as italic it would probably be better and take care of all book and journal/magazine titles, and the rest would probably be pure emphasis of words in text.

So how is <em> and <strong> visually different to <i> and <b>? The answer is there's no difference. <i> shows The Lancet exactly the same as <em>. And as you see in your post and this post, italics are being used and not emphasis.

[bookman156]

So how is <em> and <strong> visually different to <i> and <b>? The answer is there's no difference. <i> shows The Lancet exactly the same as <em>. And as you see in your post and this post, italics are being used and not emphasis.

Yes, I know. But when I started in web design it was considered bad practice to use i and b as everyone was moving to em and strong. So that is my habit as yours is for i and b. I wouldn't be surprised if I and b are chucked in the bin again some time.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by bookman156

Yes, I know. But when I started in web design it was considered bad practice to use i and b as everyone was moving to em and strong. So that is my habit as yours is for i and b. I wouldn't be surprised if I and b are chucked in the bin again some time.

Not going to happen. That's like tossing out <p>.

[bookman156]

Not going to happen. That's like tossing out <p>.

Probably not, but what they deprecated once they can deprecate twice.

[bookman156]

Equally, what they haven't yet deprecated may also come in for scrutiny, since we now have tags serving duplicate purposes. Maybe they'll deprecate em and strong. Who knows?

[bookman156]

I mean, look at this:

In the earlier specification, the <i> tag was just a presentational element that was used to show a text in italic. But now it defines the semantics and not the typographic display.

From: https://www.w3docs.com/learn-html/html-i-tag.html

So they're saying there is no longer any difference between i and em.

[bookman156]

As for b:

In HTML 5 it’s recommended to use the <b> tag only as a last resort, when it is not possible to use other tags.

From: https://www.w3docs.com/learn-html/html-b-tag.html

So what's 'a last resort' exactly, since you can always use something else.

[JSWolf]

Sorry, but both links are wrong. <i> and <b> are not for last resort. The are for first resort.