Best way to do italic and bold

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by fbrzvnrnd

Again: why the author is using a italic? "It is a dream sequence". There is a "dream tag"? Not in XHTML. Maybe in TEI, I don't know (for example, in TEI we have tag for ironic sentences). XHTML give us poor poor semantics.
What I do if I have a "dream sequence"?

<div class="dream">
<p>Three times Randolph Carter dreamed of the marvellous city, and three times was he snatched away while still he paused on the high terrace above it. (et ceterae)</p>
</div>

if there is not a semantic for dreams, why fill the xhtml code of <i> to remember a typographic way to handle the text, when I can simply add a .dream p {font-style:italic} in css?

My point of view oblivious. And, yes, the non-novel book are more suitable to receive semantic works.

This would require the ebook creator (who, in most situations is not the author) to have a detailed understanding of the author's motivation for every instance of applying formatting to text. In many situations such information is simply not available.

[fbrzvnrnd]

Originally Posted by HarryT

This would require the ebook creator (who, in most situations is not the author) to have a detailed understanding of the author's motivation for every instance of applying formatting to text. In many situations such information is simply not available.

"Many situations" is too much imho. If you use <q>, <em>, <cite>, <blockquote> and the correct CSS for cases like "dream sequence", the <i> use has to be very rare.

[bookman156]

Mostly an author's intention for using italic is no more than convention, and because it usefully prevents say book titles being read as part of the text. From an editorial perspective, 'house style' dictates use of italic, and this is mostly based on books such as The Chicago Manual of Style. It makes sense in many of its proclamations, but to suppose the author has any degree of intention beyond house style is reading more into it than is there, and also providing a level of invisible annotation that is dependent on the annotator being almost godlike in their dedication to tagging at a granularity that the reader simply supplies naturally (do I need a Latin phrase tagged as Latin, I can see it's Latin). As for translation of phrases, ebook software can do that if the author has been so 1950s as not to do it in the text.

To me this obsession with micro-data seems to be solely for the collation of automatic lists, which are only as good as the annotator. And who is the annotator? The author or someone in an ebook production house? Frankly, speaking as a print editor, much italic in print books is not necessarily supplied by the author in the first place, but rather by the editor ensuring that the typescript conforms to house style. Mostly the only italic of importance supplied by the author is in fiction and is limited to the odd word of emphasis. The rest is house style. If book titles are italicised at such-and-such a publisher, they will be, regardless of how the author presented them. If the preference is for titles in inverted commas and not italic, that's how they will be done, even if the author italicised them.

[bookman156]

I also don't see what the point of providing a dream class div is when <em> is perfectly fine. Although editorially mere italic or emphasised voice may not be enough to distinguish a dream sequence from a non-dream sequence and some discussion between the author and editor would doubtless ensue over that point.

[fbrzvnrnd]

I never think "italic" or "em". An "em" could be a bold in red color, if there is a reason to use that color and that weight. So, if a chapter is a dream, why I have to emphasize every single paragraph? It is a dream, and I mark the chapter as dream.
Typographic is in CSS, not in XML. IMHO.
About the microdata, I think microdata are more important in ebook that in web. Microdata (or semantic markup) is the best way to give life to your information: index, query, relationship between text and graph, questions, gamification, animation and more.

[bookman156]

If an author wants to make it clear that text is a dream the easiest way is just to title the chapter accordingly. When in doubt, spell it out. But perhaps the author preferred that the reader didn't realise it was a dream until the character woke up, and was annoyed with his simple-minded editor for using italic.

Life is a dream. We don't italicise that. Perhaps we haven't realised...

Whether you think italic or bold red is neither here nor there, all you're doing is distinguishing one thing from another thing. That's the bottom line.

[HarryT]

Personally, I wake up every day and thank all the gods that the old <blink> tag that used to give you flashing text is no longer supported. I shudder to think how it could be abused in some ebooks. Large red flashing titles, perhaps?

[bookman156]

Originally Posted by fbrzvnrnd

About the microdata, I think microdata are more important in ebook that in web. Microdata (or semantic markup) is the best way to give life to your information: index, query, relationship between text and graph, questions, gamification, animation and more.

Well, I don't think of it as 'micro-data' as such, but of course any book that would benefit from a good index should have one, and all footnotes should be hyperlinked both ways. But beyond that, it seems like dredging sludge for bits of broken bottle.

[fbrzvnrnd]

Originally Posted by bookman156

bold red is neither here nor there, all you're doing is distinguishing one thing from another thing. That's the bottom line.

I do not understand what you mean.

[bookman156]

Originally Posted by fbrzvnrnd

I do not understand what you mean.

I mean I italicise or emphasise to call out a distinction. I italicise a book title so the whole of the title can be seen at once and I don't have to wonder where it ends and where the text as such carries on. Equally, if I emphasise a word in speech I mean to mimic just the way it would be said or to give some alternative meaning by the emphasis that wouldn't be there if it wasn't emphasised. But in both cases what has been done is simply distinguishing one textual item from its textual background. The purpose is inherent in each case from the context provided by the words and does not need to be invisibly second-guessed as a matter of routine by an ebook production company.

[fbrzvnrnd]

Originally Posted by bookman156

Well, I don't think of it as 'micro-data' as such, but of course any book that would benefit from a good index should have one, and all footnotes should be hyperlinked both ways. But beyond that, it seems like dredging sludge for bits of broken bottle.

Actually we have some magazine in ebook and paper. An geopolitical one, one talking about literature for children and one for handicap. When we cite books, articles, movies, comics, historical events, we use a markup that allow us to build several interactive index, or glossary. I don't think this is a "dredging sludge for bits of broken bottle", but offer different ways to the reader to access the magazine, search information, have a global idea of what the magazine is talking about, move from one article to another coherent with the first one.

[bookman156]

Originally Posted by fbrzvnrnd

Actually we have some magazine in ebook and paper. An geopolitical one, one talking about literature for children and one for handicap. When we cite books, articles, movies, comics, historical events, we use a markup that allow us to build several interactive index, or glossary. I don't think this is a "dredging sludge for bits of broken bottle", but offer different ways to the reader to access the magazine, search information, have a global idea of what the magazine is talking about, move from one article to another coherent with the first one.

Well you see I am of the school of thought that a glossary and index should be done by hand by the author. They may have used software in its preparation or they may just have done it the long way on postcards, but it is selective and intuitional, not automatic and blanket. There are many words that shouldn't be in a glossary, and an index is better if it looks like a human has put some thought into it. But, failing that, a late-stage index and glossary from this kind of tagging is better than nothing.

[fbrzvnrnd]

Originally Posted by bookman156

I mean I italicise or emphasise to call out a distinction. I italicise a book title so the whole of the title can be seen at once and I don't have to wonder where it ends and where the text as such carries on. Equally, if I emphasise a word in speech I mean to mimic just the way it would be said or to give some alternative meaning by the emphasis that wouldn't be there if it wasn't emphasised. But in both cases what has been done is simply distinguishing one textual item from its textual background. The purpose is inherent in each case from the context provided by the words and does not need to be invisibly second-guessed as a matter of routine by an ebook production company.

Why you call out a distinction? Because you want to formalize a data inserted in your content. Why a title is often big and centered? Because it is its historical formalization. For the paper. In digital we can formalize more that those that can be seen, because we do not use paper, but we have a microprocessor that can work on those datas. Of course you can make do with a single index and some hyperlink in notes. Or go beyond.

[fbrzvnrnd]

Originally Posted by bookman156

Well you see I am of the school of thought that a glossary and index should be done by hand by the author. They may have used software in its preparation or they may just have done it the long way on postcards, but it is selective and intuitional, not automatic and blanket. There are many words that shouldn't be in a glossary, and an index is better if it looks like a human has put some thought into it. But, failing that, a late-stage index and glossary from this kind of tagging is better than nothing.

The two things are not one against the other: I believe that we will have a new type of editor who - on the one hand - organizes the text and its requirements, on the other hand formalizes and programs it. Not everything has to be marked. Computer runs query, but the information are handles by editor, author and publisher.

[bookman156]

Originally Posted by fbrzvnrnd

Why you call out a distinction? Because you want to formalize a data inserted in your content. Why a title is often big and centered? Because it is its historical formalization. For the paper. In digital we can formalize more that those that can be seen, because we do not use paper, but we have a microprocessor that can work on those datas. Of course you can make do with a single index and some hyperlink in notes. Or go beyond.

It depends on the book. I agree that we can 'go beyond', if the book calls for it. But if done as a matter of routine it just becomes the application of a method without sufficient knowledge to make judgment calls. Where does it end? Will you tag 'where' as a word of localisation, 'does' as a word of action, 'it' as an unspecified object, and 'end' as indicative of finality?