<B> or CSS ?

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Travis Newbury, Dec 28, 2004.

  1. What is the advantage of using CSS to make a single instance on a page bold?

    I only want this <b>word or words</b> bold.

    vs

    I only want this <span class="boldWord">word or words</span> bold.

    Or any other CSS method. It seems to me that, using CSS would actually
    be more work or take more bandwidth.

    Is there an advantage I am missing? (other than the obvious mixing
    content with presentation)

    --
    -=tn=-
     
    Travis Newbury, Dec 28, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Travis Newbury

    Neal Guest

    On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 18:59:24 -0500, Travis Newbury <> wrote:

    > What is the advantage of using CSS to make a single instance on a page
    > bold?
    >
    > I only want this <b>word or words</b> bold.
    >
    > vs
    >
    > I only want this <span class="boldWord">word or words</span> bold.
    >
    > Or any other CSS method. It seems to me that, using CSS would actually
    > be more work or take more bandwidth.
    >
    > Is there an advantage I am missing? (other than the obvious mixing
    > content with presentation)


    It's not just bandwidth, it's portability and meaning.

    If the characters MUST be bold for understanding, and no other HTML covers
    it, <b> is fine.

    <i> is easier to illustrate. If the italics are mere decoration and convey
    no meaning on their own, the CSS is correct. If the italics express, say,
    a mathematical variable, <var> markup is appropriate. But if it's a name
    of an opera, magazine or ship, where italics are a stylistic requirement,
    <i> is appropriate as there is no better markup to choose.
     
    Neal, Dec 29, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Neal wrote:
    >> What is the advantage of using CSS to make a single instance on a page
    >> bold?

    > It's not just bandwidth, it's portability and meaning.
    > If the characters MUST be bold for understanding, and no other HTML
    > covers it, <b> is fine.


    Thanks!

    --
    -=tn=-
     
    Travis Newbury, Dec 29, 2004
    #3
  4. Neal wrote:
    > But if it's a name of an opera, magazine or ship, where italics are a
    > stylistic requirement, <i> is appropriate as there is no better
    > markup to choose.


    What's wrong with <cite> for the name of a magazine?
     
    Leif K-Brooks, Dec 29, 2004
    #4
  5. Travis Newbury

    Neal Guest

    On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 19:35:18 -0500, Leif K-Brooks <>
    wrote:

    > Neal wrote:
    >> But if it's a name of an opera, magazine or ship, where italics are a
    >> stylistic requirement, <i> is appropriate as there is no better
    >> markup to choose.

    >
    > What's wrong with <cite> for the name of a magazine?


    If you're actually citing it, sure. But if you're mentioning the person
    you've interviewed has had articles published in <i>Assholes Weekly</i>,
    how else can you mark it up? You're not citing.
     
    Neal, Dec 29, 2004
    #5
  6. Travis Newbury

    Duende Guest

    While sitting in a puddle Neal scribbled in the mud:

    > But if you're mentioning the person
    > you've interviewed has had articles published in <i>Assholes Weekly</i>,


    RtS was interviewed?

    --
    D?
    If it ain't broken fix it anyway.
     
    Duende, Dec 29, 2004
    #6
  7. Neal wrote:
    > If you're actually citing it, sure. But if you're mentioning the person
    > you've interviewed has had articles published in <i>Assholes Weekly</i>,
    > how else can you mark it up? You're not citing.


    Sure, but calling it a citation is less of a lie than calling it
    italics-for-the-sake-of-italics, which is the only semantically-correct
    use of <i>.
     
    Leif K-Brooks, Dec 29, 2004
    #7
  8. Travis Newbury

    Neal Guest

    On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 20:16:00 -0500, Leif K-Brooks <>
    wrote:

    > Neal wrote:
    >> If you're actually citing it, sure. But if you're mentioning the person
    >> you've interviewed has had articles published in <i>Assholes
    >> Weekly</i>, how else can you mark it up? You're not citing.

    >
    > Sure, but calling it a citation is less of a lie than calling it
    > italics-for-the-sake-of-italics, which is the only semantically-correct
    > use of <i>.


    Hmm?

    The New York Times editor, blah blah...

    Now how do YOU propose we code this, with the understanding that this
    newspaper's title should properly be italicized? And - we're not quoting
    it, so no cite!
     
    Neal, Dec 29, 2004
    #8
  9. Neal wrote:
    > On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 20:16:00 -0500, Leif K-Brooks
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> Sure, but calling it a citation is less of a lie than calling it
    >> italics-for-the-sake-of-italics, which is the only
    >> semantically-correct use of <i>.

    >
    > The New York Times editor, blah blah...
    >
    > Now how do YOU propose we code this, with the understanding that this
    > newspaper's title should properly be italicized? And - we're not quoting
    > it, so no cite!


    I would use <cite>. It's not perfectly correct, but surely it's more
    semantically meaningful than <i>? The HTML 4.01 standard even says that
    <cite> can be used as a "reference to other sources"[1], which doesn't
    seem to require quoting.

    [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/text.html#h-9.2.1
     
    Leif K-Brooks, Dec 29, 2004
    #9
  10. Travis Newbury

    Neal Guest

    On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 20:40:00 -0500, Leif K-Brooks <>
    wrote:

    >> Now how do YOU propose we code this, with the understanding that this
    >> newspaper's title should properly be italicized? And - we're not
    >> quoting it, so no cite!

    >
    > I would use <cite>. It's not perfectly correct, but surely it's more
    > semantically meaningful than <i>? The HTML 4.01 standard even says that
    > <cite> can be used as a "reference to other sources"[1], which doesn't
    > seem to require quoting.
    >
    > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/text.html#h-9.2.1


    CITE:
    Contains a citation or a reference to other sources.

    Loosely, I would agree, but EXTREMELY loosely, and in absence of other
    facts.

    Now, how about a ship name? Or the title of an opera? Am I citing the ship
    or the opera? Am I referencing the ship or the opera?

    If the <i>Mikado</i> was put on upon the <i>H.M.S. Doodywad</i>, how would
    YOU code it?
     
    Neal, Dec 29, 2004
    #10
  11. Travis Newbury

    Richard Guest

    Travis Newbury wrote:

    > What is the advantage of using CSS to make a single instance on a page
    > bold?


    > I only want this <b>word or words</b> bold.


    > vs


    > I only want this <span class="boldWord">word or words</span> bold.


    > Or any other CSS method. It seems to me that, using CSS would actually
    > be more work or take more bandwidth.


    > Is there an advantage I am missing? (other than the obvious mixing
    > content with presentation)


    How about defining your requirements in the css style area?

    <style>
    b#bold { ..... }
    </style>

    <b id="bold">
     
    Richard, Dec 29, 2004
    #11
  12. In article <>, Neal
    () dropped a +5 bundle of words...

    > On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 20:40:00 -0500, Leif K-Brooks <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >> Now how do YOU propose we code this, with the understanding that this
    > >> newspaper's title should properly be italicized? And - we're not
    > >> quoting it, so no cite!

    > >
    > > I would use <cite>. It's not perfectly correct, but surely it's more
    > > semantically meaningful than <i>? The HTML 4.01 standard even says that
    > > <cite> can be used as a "reference to other sources"[1], which doesn't
    > > seem to require quoting.
    > >
    > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/text.html#h-9.2.1

    >
    > CITE:
    > Contains a citation or a reference to other sources.
    >
    > Loosely, I would agree, but EXTREMELY loosely, and in absence of other
    > facts.
    >
    > Now, how about a ship name? Or the title of an opera? Am I citing the ship
    > or the opera? Am I referencing the ship or the opera?
    >
    > If the <i>Mikado</i> was put on upon the <i>H.M.S. Doodywad</i>, how would
    > YOU code it?


    Actually, it would be the USS Doodywad. HMS is for
    british/canadian/austrailian ships.



    --
    Starshine Moonbeam
    mhm31x9 Smeeter#29 WSD#30
    sTaRShInE_mOOnBeAm aT HoTmAil dOt CoM
     
    Starshine Moonbeam, Dec 29, 2004
    #12
  13. Travis Newbury

    rf Guest

    "Starshine Moonbeam" <> wrote in
    > In article <>, Neal
    > () dropped a +5 bundle of words...
    >
    > > On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 20:40:00 -0500, Leif K-Brooks

    <>
    > > wrote:
    > >
    > > >> Now how do YOU propose we code this, with the understanding that this
    > > >> newspaper's title should properly be italicized? And - we're not
    > > >> quoting it, so no cite!
    > > >
    > > > I would use <cite>. It's not perfectly correct, but surely it's more
    > > > semantically meaningful than <i>? The HTML 4.01 standard even says

    that
    > > > <cite> can be used as a "reference to other sources"[1], which doesn't
    > > > seem to require quoting.
    > > >
    > > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/text.html#h-9.2.1

    > >
    > > CITE:
    > > Contains a citation or a reference to other sources.
    > >
    > > Loosely, I would agree, but EXTREMELY loosely, and in absence of other
    > > facts.
    > >
    > > Now, how about a ship name? Or the title of an opera? Am I citing the

    ship
    > > or the opera? Am I referencing the ship or the opera?
    > >
    > > If the <i>Mikado</i> was put on upon the <i>H.M.S. Doodywad</i>, how

    would
    > > YOU code it?

    >
    > Actually, it would be the USS Doodywad. HMS is for
    > british/canadian/austrailian ships.


    Why could it not *be* british/canadian/australian? It doesn't *have* to be
    US. The minority that is the US does not run everything :)

    In any case, irrelevant. The <i>Doodywad</i> is a submarine and you don't
    have enough room on a submarine to stage the <i>Mikado</i>. The chorus line
    would trip over the torpedos and blow the entire troup higher than up.

    --
    Cheers
    Richard.
     
    rf, Dec 29, 2004
    #13
  14. Neal <> wrote:

    > CITE:
    > Contains a citation or a reference to other sources.
    >
    > Loosely, I would agree, but EXTREMELY loosely, and in absence of
    > other facts.


    Yes, it is loose, and it is a constant source of confusion, since
    people misunderstand it as quoting. (For example, German "Zitat" and
    Swedish "citat" mean quotation.)

    > Now, how about a ship name? Or the title of an opera? Am I citing
    > the ship or the opera? Am I referencing the ship or the opera?


    Yes. As usual, HTML 2.0 is an improvement over its successors in
    clarity, though not very clear on this issue:

    "The CITE element is used to indicate the title of a book or other
    citation. It is typically rendered as italics. For example:

    He just couldn't get enough of <cite>The Grapes of Wrath</cite>."

    http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/html-spec/html-spec_5.html#SEC5.7.1.1

    Thus, a title of a book (even when not presented as a reference) is a
    "citation", and there are other "citations" as well.

    --
    Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
    Pages about Web authoring: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/www.html
     
    Jukka K. Korpela, Dec 29, 2004
    #14
  15. In article <%VqAd.92597$>, rf
    (rf@.invalid) dropped a +5 bundle of words...

    > "Starshine Moonbeam" <> wrote in
    > > In article <>, Neal
    > > () dropped a +5 bundle of words...
    > >
    > > > On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 20:40:00 -0500, Leif K-Brooks

    > <>
    > > > wrote:
    > > >
    > > > >> Now how do YOU propose we code this, with the understanding that this
    > > > >> newspaper's title should properly be italicized? And - we're not
    > > > >> quoting it, so no cite!
    > > > >
    > > > > I would use <cite>. It's not perfectly correct, but surely it's more
    > > > > semantically meaningful than <i>? The HTML 4.01 standard even says

    > that
    > > > > <cite> can be used as a "reference to other sources"[1], which doesn't
    > > > > seem to require quoting.
    > > > >
    > > > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/text.html#h-9.2.1
    > > >
    > > > CITE:
    > > > Contains a citation or a reference to other sources.
    > > >
    > > > Loosely, I would agree, but EXTREMELY loosely, and in absence of other
    > > > facts.
    > > >
    > > > Now, how about a ship name? Or the title of an opera? Am I citing the

    > ship
    > > > or the opera? Am I referencing the ship or the opera?
    > > >
    > > > If the <i>Mikado</i> was put on upon the <i>H.M.S. Doodywad</i>, how

    > would
    > > > YOU code it?

    > >
    > > Actually, it would be the USS Doodywad. HMS is for
    > > british/canadian/austrailian ships.

    >
    > Why could it not *be* british/canadian/australian? It doesn't *have* to be
    > US. The minority that is the US does not run everything :)
    >
    > In any case, irrelevant. The <i>Doodywad</i> is a submarine and you don't
    > have enough room on a submarine to stage the <i>Mikado</i>. The chorus line
    > would trip over the torpedos and blow the entire troup higher than up.


    See, now if it was the USS Doodywad, you wouldn't have that problem. ;)


    --
    Starshine Moonbeam
    mhm31x9 Smeeter#29 WSD#30
    sTaRShInE_mOOnBeAm aT HoTmAil dOt CoM
     
    Starshine Moonbeam, Dec 29, 2004
    #15
  16. While the city slept, Travis Newbury () feverishly typed...

    > What is the advantage of using CSS to make a single instance on a
    > page bold?
    >
    > I only want this <b>word or words</b> bold.
    >
    > vs
    >
    > I only want this <span class="boldWord">word or words</span> bold.


    I only want this <strong>word or words</strong> bold. ?

    Cheers,
    Nige


    --
    Nigel Moss
    http://www.nigenet.org.uk
    Mail address not valid. , take the DOG. out!
    In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is very, very busy!
     
    nice.guy.nige, Dec 29, 2004
    #16
  17. Travis Newbury

    Neal Guest

    On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 05:09:01 +0000 (UTC), Jukka K. Korpela
    <> wrote:

    > Yes. As usual, HTML 2.0 is an improvement over its successors in
    > clarity, though not very clear on this issue:
    >
    > "The CITE element is used to indicate the title of a book or other
    > citation. It is typically rendered as italics. For example:
    >
    > He just couldn't get enough of <cite>The Grapes of Wrath</cite>."
    >
    > http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/html-spec/html-spec_5.html#SEC5.7.1.1
    >
    > Thus, a title of a book (even when not presented as a reference) is a
    > "citation", and there are other "citations" as well.


    You're opening the door for <dl> to be used for a play script, you know...
    I don't think the prose is normative here.
     
    Neal, Dec 29, 2004
    #17
  18. Travis Newbury

    Neal Guest

    On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 22:24:33 -0600, Starshine Moonbeam
    <> wrote:

    > In article <>, Neal
    > () dropped a +5 bundle of words...
    >> If the <i>Mikado</i> was put on upon the <i>H.M.S. Doodywad</i>, how
    >> would
    >> YOU code it?

    >
    > Actually, it would be the USS Doodywad. HMS is for
    > british/canadian/austrailian ships.


    Right, but since the rightwing has bankrupted our culture and art, what's
    the chances of seeing G&S on an American ship? But I digress...
     
    Neal, Dec 29, 2004
    #18
  19. While the city slept, rf (rf@.invalid) feverishly typed...

    [the mikado on the Doodywad]
    > In any case, irrelevant. The <i>Doodywad</i> is a submarine and you
    > don't have enough room on a submarine to stage the <i>Mikado</i>. The
    > chorus line would trip over the torpedos and blow the entire troup
    > higher than up.


    So another Gilbert & Sullivan company goes up in smoke... And this is a
    problem? ;-)

    Cheers,
    Nige

    --
    Nigel Moss
    http://www.nigenet.org.uk
    Mail address not valid. , take the DOG. out!
    In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is very, very busy!
     
    nice.guy.nige, Dec 29, 2004
    #19
  20. Neal wrote:
    > CITE:
    > Contains a citation or a reference to other sources.


    How about we define "cite" as being an abbreviation for "citable", as in
    something which _could_ be used as a citation?
     
    Leif K-Brooks, Dec 29, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Eric
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    757
    clintonG
    Dec 24, 2004
  2. tom watson

    print.css and screen.css

    tom watson, Sep 9, 2003, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    486
    Jukka K. Korpela
    Sep 9, 2003
  3. Joshua Beall
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    461
    Bertilo Wennergren
    Dec 10, 2003
  4. Noozer
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    2,205
    Mitja
    Oct 13, 2004
  5. Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    677
    Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
    Nov 15, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page