<B> or CSS ?

[Travis Newbury]

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)

 

[Neal]

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.

 

[Travis Newbury]

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!

 

[Leif K-Brooks]

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?

 

[Neal]

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.

 

[Duende]

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?

 

[Leif K-Brooks]

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>.

 

[Neal]

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!

 

[Leif K-Brooks]

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

 

[Neal]

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?

 

[Richard]

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.

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">

 

[Starshine Moonbeam]

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.

 

[rf]

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.

 

[Jukka K. Korpela]

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.

 

[Starshine Moonbeam]

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.

 

[nice.guy.nige]

While the city slept, Travis Newbury ([email protected]) 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

 

[Neal]

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]

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...

 

[nice.guy.nige]

While the city slept, rf ([email protected]) 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

 

[Leif K-Brooks]

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?