Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > HTML > Will <strong> tags be deprecated?

Reply
Thread Tools

Will <strong> tags be deprecated?

 
 
Fabian
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-06-2003
Hello,

I'm new here so if there's a FAQ or something or if I'm doing something
wrong, correct me and accept my apologies

So, I'm in a heavy discussion with some people at my school about <strong>
and <em> tags. Some of them say these tags will be deprecated. I know when
XML comes around all tags will be deprecated, but I mean in a short notice
of time?

And is it better to use <strong>-tags or special css tags to define just
something to be bold. In my opinion, I'd say I would stick to the <strong>
tags, they are meant to put things bold. It's obvious.


Can anyone give me an appropriate answer about this?

So will the <strong> and <em> (or <i>/<b>) tags be deprecated? And what's
better <strong> or <span style="font-weight: bold;"> when it only comes to
put things bold.


Thanks, Fabian Deceuninck
http://givelove.be/


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Hywel Jenkins
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-06-2003
In article <TUhgb.61750$(E-Mail Removed)-ops.be>,
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) says...
> Hello,
>
> I'm new here so if there's a FAQ or something or if I'm doing something
> wrong, correct me and accept my apologies
>
> So, I'm in a heavy discussion with some people at my school about <strong>
> and <em> tags. Some of them say these tags will be deprecated. I know when
> XML comes around all tags will be deprecated


Eh? You'll still need to transform the XML so that it can be rendered
by the browser. XML is simply a data format, after all.


> And is it better to use <strong>-tags or special css tags to define just
> something to be bold. In my opinion, I'd say I would stick to the <strong>
> tags, they are meant to put things bold. It's obvious.
>
>
> Can anyone give me an appropriate answer about this?
>
> So will the <strong> and <em> (or <i>/<b>) tags be deprecated? And what's
> better <strong> or <span style="font-weight: bold;"> when it only comes to
> put things bold.


Depends on whether you want to change the meaning of the sentence.

--
Hywel I do not eat quiche
http://hyweljenkins.co.uk/
http://hyweljenkins.co.uk/mfaq.php
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Fabian
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-06-2003
Hywel Jenkins wrote:
>
> Eh? You'll still need to transform the XML so that it can be rendered
> by the browser. XML is simply a data format, after all.
>


Well, I meant that, I just worded it wrong. Or however you say it. I'm Dutch
and I lack good knowledge of technical English. Sorry


>> So will the <strong> and <em> (or <i>/<b>) tags be deprecated? And
>> what's better <strong> or <span style="font-weight: bold;"> when it
>> only comes to put things bold.

>
> Depends on whether you want to change the meaning of the sentence.


Uhm. What do you mean by that? The meaning of the sentence like in change
the properties of <strong> ? So it can do more things than bold?

If it's that, no. I just want like one word bold. What's better than? Or a
paragraph.


--
Fabian


 
Reply With Quote
 
Steve Pugh
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-06-2003
"Fabian" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>So, I'm in a heavy discussion with some people at my school about <strong>
>and <em> tags. Some of them say these tags will be deprecated.


<strong> and <em> are the XHTML 2.0 draft so will be around for a
while. There's no reason to deprecate them as they server a useful
function - of marking emphasis.

> I know when
>XML comes around all tags will be deprecated, but I mean in a short notice
>of time?


What does XML have to do with it?
XML is not a replacement for HTML and XML is already here so I think
you must be confused. XML certainly isn't going to deprecate all tags,
whatever that would mean.

>And is it better to use <strong>-tags or special css tags to define just
>something to be bold. In my opinion, I'd say I would stick to the <strong>
>tags, they are meant to put things bold. It's obvious.


No they are not maent to put things in bold. They are meant to
strongly emphasise things. That may or may not be rendered as bold. If
you just want to make something bold, but do not want to strongly
emphasise it then yous <b> or CSS.

>So will the <strong> and <em> (or <i>/<b>) tags be deprecated?


No. <strong> and <em> are in XHTML 2.0.
<i> and <b> are not deprecated - they are just fine in XHTML 1.1 but
don't exist at all in XHTML 2.0, they've skipped right over the
deprecation phase.

>And what's
>better <strong> or <span style="font-weight: bold;"> when it only comes to
>put things bold.


If it is being strongly emphasised then <strong> is correctt,
regardless of whether it is styled as being bold or not.
Inline styles are generally a bad idea, but font-weight: bold; is
correct for text that is tobe bold, applied to whatever the most
appropriate (X)HTML element is.

Steve

--
"My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you,
I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor

Steve Pugh <(E-Mail Removed)> <http://steve.pugh.net/>
 
Reply With Quote
 
Fabian
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-06-2003
Thanks for your good response.

About the XML you're right, I don't know enough about it. Sorry. I ws
confused. We haven't learned a lot about it yet. Forgive me

So <strong> and <em> will live on, while <i> and <b> will be deprecated in
the next version?

Thanks!

Fabian


 
Reply With Quote
 
Hywel Jenkins
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-06-2003
In article <S6igb.61771$(E-Mail Removed)-ops.be>,
(E-Mail Removed) says...
> Hywel Jenkins wrote:
> >
> > Eh? You'll still need to transform the XML so that it can be rendered
> > by the browser. XML is simply a data format, after all.
> >

>
> Well, I meant that, I just worded it wrong. Or however you say it. I'm Dutch
> and I lack good knowledge of technical English. Sorry
>
>
> >> So will the <strong> and <em> (or <i>/<b>) tags be deprecated? And
> >> what's better <strong> or <span style="font-weight: bold;"> when it
> >> only comes to put things bold.

> >
> > Depends on whether you want to change the meaning of the sentence.

>
> Uhm. What do you mean by that? The meaning of the sentence like in change
> the properties of <strong> ? So it can do more things than bold?


Appearance-wise, probably not. However, and audio browser (one that
reads the page to those with poor eysight) may apply particular emphasis
to <strong>this text</strong> whereas the style of <span style="font-
weight:Bold;">this text</span> may mean nothing to the browser.

>
> If it's that, no. I just want like one word bold. What's better than? Or a
> paragraph.


It depends why you want the text emboldened. As I've just come back
from the gym and can hardly type, there's no chance that I can come up
with examples of either case.

--
Hywel I do not eat quiche
http://hyweljenkins.co.uk/
http://hyweljenkins.co.uk/mfaq.php
 
Reply With Quote
 
Toby A Inkster
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-06-2003
Fabian wrote:

> So <strong> and <em> will live on, while <i> and <b> will be deprecated in
> the next version?


Wrong. <b> and <i> will not be deprecated in the next version of XHTML,
they will not be in the next version of XHTML *at* *all*!

--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
Contact Me - http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/?id=132

 
Reply With Quote
 
Andy Dingley
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-06-2003
On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 18:16:30 GMT, "Fabian" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>So <strong> and <em> will live on, while <i> and <b> will be deprecated in
>the next version?


I doubt if any will be deprecated. <i> and <b> have such a long
typographic tradition that they're arguably as much a piece of content
as a piece of presentation.

--
Die Gotterspammerung - Junkmail of the Gods
 
Reply With Quote
 
Micah Cowan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-06-2003
"Fabian" <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> Hello,
>
> I'm new here so if there's a FAQ or something or if I'm doing something
> wrong, correct me and accept my apologies
>
> So, I'm in a heavy discussion with some people at my school about <strong>
> and <em> tags. Some of them say these tags will be deprecated. I know when
> XML comes around all tags will be deprecated, but I mean in a short notice
> of time?


XML has been around for some time. It's goals do not include
replacing HTML; they have more to do with replacing SGML. But to
talk about when XML "comes around" is kind of silly.

If you are referring to XHTML, I wouldn't bother with
forward-compatibility (to versions above 1.0/parts-of-1.1, that
is), it's a complete (and much needed) redesign. Unfortunately, I
have this feeling that XHTML 2.0 will never really be supported
by main-stream stuff... hope I'm wrong.

I'm pairing the above quote with a related question from later in
your message:

> So will the <strong> and <em> (or <i>/<b>) tags be deprecated? And what's
> better <strong> or <span style="font-weight: bold;"> when it only comes to
> put things bold.


<i> and <b>, IMO, should have been deprecated some time
ago. I have never heard of <strong> and <em> being deprecated,
and find that highly unlikely, considering that, of the four you
mentioned, they are the only ones that indicate the intended
*meaning* rather than formatting. Note that <strike> and <u> are
already deprecated, and will not be found in the strict DTD.

As to which is better, it depends on context. If you want
something bold, there must be a *reason*. If the reason is to
strengthen or emphasize a phrase or word, <strong> and <em> are
entirely appropriate. If the intention is to typographically
differentiate a word or phrase (say, a programming language
keyword), you should probably use span with a class (inline style
attribute would be a poor idea). Say, <span class="prog-lang-keywd">.

> And is it better to use <strong>-tags or special css tags to define just
> something to be bold. In my opinion, I'd say I would stick to the <strong>
> tags, they are meant to put things bold. It's obvious.


Strong is *not* meant to put things in bold--you should not rely
on that. The standard specifically says, "The presentation of
phrase elements [such as STRONG and EM] depends on the user
agent." It goes on to say how they have typically been formatted;
but they exist *explicitly* so you don't have to have knowledge
of how they are formatted. If you want them formatted a specific
way, you should use CSS to indicate so.

-Micah
 
Reply With Quote
 
Steve Pugh
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-06-2003
"Fabian" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>So <strong> and <em> will live on, while <i> and <b> will be deprecated in
>the next version?


No, as I said <i> and <b> are not in the XHTML 2.0 draft at all.
They will not deprecated (like <font> is in HTML 4) they will simply
not be there at all.

Steve

--
"My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you,
I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor

Steve Pugh <(E-Mail Removed)> <http://steve.pugh.net/>
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
All style tags after the first 30 style tags on an HTML page are not applied in Internet Explorer Rob Nicholson ASP .Net 3 05-28-2005 03:11 PM
Evaluating struts tags inside my own custom tags... A. Brinkmann Java 2 04-16-2004 07:44 AM
JSP newbie - use include, custom tags, standard tags - or what? Mike Java 3 01-09-2004 09:30 AM
RegEx to find CFML tags nested in HTML tags Dean H. Saxe Perl 0 01-03-2004 06:11 PM
Custom Tags within Custom Tags. Ranganath Java 2 10-21-2003 06:14 AM



Advertisments