, or for italics ? - Page 13

bookman156 · 07-19-2022, 09:37 AM

Quote:

Sorry, but both links are wrong. and are not for last resort. The are for first resort.

Wishful thinking is preference struggling against the tide.

Turtle91 · 07-19-2022, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JSWolf

... Programs reading a book won't be doing anything different with and then and .

Where, may I ask, did you get that idea? Is it wishful thinking on your part, or is it based on an exhaustive study of text-to-speech devices/apps???

You are, and have always been (AFAIR), thinking of / / as purely visual presentations. You consistently ignore other functions - I suppose because they are not functions of your device. No matter how many times people point this out to you, you continue to ignore the non-visual applications of /...

bookman156 brings up valid points, and links to references, and you simply say 'Sorry, but both links are wrong.'...talk about putting your head in the sand... 'those links are wrong because I think they are wrong' doesn't advance your argument.

Perhaps you could post a link to an accessibility standard, or to a text-to-speech standard, that says "We will no longer read emphasized, or strong, text in any way different than the rest of the words on the page, so stop using them." ~rotsa ruck

JSWolf · 07-19-2022, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turtle91

Where, may I ask, did you get that idea? Is it wishful thinking on your part, or is it based on an exhaustive study of text-to-speech devices/apps???

You are, and have always been (AFAIR), thinking of / / as purely visual presentations. You consistently ignore other functions - I suppose because they are not functions of your device. No matter how many times people point this out to you, you continue to ignore the non-visual applications of /...

bookman156 brings up valid points, and links to references, and you simply say 'Sorry, but both links are wrong.'...talk about putting your head in the sand... 'those links are wrong because I think they are wrong' doesn't advance your argument.

Perhaps you could post a link to an accessibility standard, or to a text-to-speech standard, that says "We will no longer read emphasized, or strong, text in any way different than the rest of the words on the page, so stop using them." ~rotsa ruck

Can you point me to any eBook reading software that treats / and any differently when reading? The last time this issue came up, nobody was able to mention such a program.

j.p.s · 07-19-2022, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Can you point me to any eBook reading software that treats / and any differently when reading? The last time this issue came up, nobody was able to mention such a program.

They did. Several. But now and have the same meaning, emphasis. So you may eventually use some standards complying device that presents other than italic and you will no longer have the option to force italic. But that is an option that should be reserved by users and devices anyway.

bookman156 · 07-19-2022, 04:38 PM

There is very little point to using the tag. Where you might want bold, in a heading, you can specify it in the CSS for h1, h2 etc. In text one hardly ever needs to emphasise anything more than , and if you do there's . So is dead. And the tag is only remaining because of indecision.

Hitch · 07-19-2022, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bookman156

There is very little point to using the tag. Where you might want bold, in a heading, you can specify it in the CSS for h1, h2 etc. In text one hardly ever needs to emphasise anything more than , and if you do there's . So is dead. And the tag is only remaining because of indecision.

Oh, well....you very very obviously don't work for self-published authors, then, if you believe THAT. Good God, nobody here would still be discussing this, in 2022, if we solely needed heading classes.

No bold? Gadzooks! Surely you jest! I've got a book in right now that has bold here, there and everywhere, plus italic, plus bold-italic (want fun? Try to find a bold-italic SANS SERIF face!!!) plus, yes, you got it, underlining.

Are we all having fun yet?

Hitch

bookman156 · 07-19-2022, 05:36 PM

What's to stop you using ?

Still, bold in text looks about as good as you've shown above. Still, I assume by 'self-published author' you mean tasteless and clueless.

JSWolf · 07-19-2022, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hitch

Oh, well....you very very obviously don't work for self-published authors, then, if you believe THAT. Good God, nobody here would still be discussing this, in 2022, if we solely needed heading classes.

No bold? Gadzooks! Surely you jest! I've got a book in right now that has bold here, there and everywhere, plus italic, plus bold-italic (want fun? Try to find a bold-italic SANS SERIF face!!!) plus, yes, you got it, underlining.

Are we all having fun yet?

Hitch

Very well said!

Of all the eBooks I've been recently having a look at, I have not seen any instance of . I have seen , , and . Mostly and not many . So in reality, and are hardly used. less so then .

bookman156 · 07-19-2022, 05:46 PM

There is no point especially to bold italic, except in h tags.

And why underline when that has always been the typewriter equivalent of italic, and is also confused for a hyperlink in an ebook.

I get that you are working with the typographically naive and perhaps talking them out of bad decisions is not worth the time.

bookman156 · 07-19-2022, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Very well said!

Seems there is a dinosaurs club around here...

JSWolf · 07-19-2022, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bookman156

What's to stop you using ?

Still, bold in text looks about as good as you've shown above. Still, I assume by 'self-published author' you mean tasteless and clueless.

Bold does not mean tasteless and clueless.

bookman156 · 07-19-2022, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Bold does not mean tasteless and clueless.

Not quite what I implied, obviously. But it seems there is tunnel-vision over this issue. Carry on with obsolete markup if you wish.

JSWolf · 07-19-2022, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bookman156

Not quite what I implied, obviously. But it seems there is tunnel-vision over this issue. Carry on with obsolete markup if you wish.

It's not obsolete. It's perfectly current and used markup. Have a look at eBooks that you've bought. Please find being used in eBooks that are not self-published.

bookman156 · 07-19-2022, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Have a look at eBooks that you've bought.

I've yet to find a commercial ebook that has good code. Look at a Random House ebook, full of rubbish code.

bookman156 · 07-19-2022, 05:58 PM

Quote:

Please find being used in eBooks that are not self-published.

This is just a statement that most ebooks aren't very well made.

07-19-2022, 04:38 PM	#185
bookman156 Addict Posts: 368 Karma: 1000000 Join Date: Mar 2016 Device: none	There is very little point to using the <b> tag. Where you might want bold, in a heading, you can specify it in the CSS for h1, h2 etc. In text one hardly ever needs to emphasise anything more than <em>, and if you do there's <strong>. So <b> is dead. And the <i> tag is only remaining because of indecision.

07-19-2022, 05:36 PM	#187
bookman156 Addict Posts: 368 Karma: 1000000 Join Date: Mar 2016 Device: none	What's to stop you using <strong>? Still, bold in text looks about as good as you've shown above. Still, I assume by 'self-published author' you mean tasteless and clueless.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Span Span Span Sigil cleaning up indesign	blackest	Sigil	31	12-06-2017 10:16 AM
Span Span Span Span	MULTIVAC	ePub	7	12-06-2014 08:58 AM
Nested Span?	Turtle91	ePub	4	05-20-2013 02:47 PM
span in span: is this problematic?	tbuyus	ePub	8	03-31-2013 08:01 AM
Remove <br /> together with span, and only span	Razzia	Recipes	3	05-30-2011 06:55 PM

07-19-2022, 05:46 PM	#189
bookman156 Addict Posts: 368 Karma: 1000000 Join Date: Mar 2016 Device: none	There is no point especially to bold italic, except in h tags. And why underline when that has always been the typewriter equivalent of italic, and is also confused for a hyperlink in an ebook. I get that you are working with the typographically naive and perhaps talking them out of bad decisions is not worth the time.