3 ms·
The puzzling aspect is that, contrary to what most people would assume, the B, I, EM and STRONG elements all came out under the same version (2.0) of HTML: http
by ezequiel-garzon 3y ago
The puzzling aspect is that, contrary to what most people would assume, the B, I, EM and STRONG elements all came out under the same version (2.0) of HTML: https://meiert.com/en/indices/html-elements/ https://meiert.com/en/indices/html-elements/
- bensecure 3y ago> https://www.w3.org/MarkUp/html-spec/html-spec_toc.html#SEC5.7 https://www.w3.org/MarkUp/html-spec/html-spec_toc.html#SEC5.... > Phrases may be marked up according to idiomatic usage, typographic appearance, or for use as hyperlink anchors. So the original standard considered both approaches valid, later standards decided that typographic usage was invalid.
- red_trumpet 3y agoNo, there is a clear distinction between typographic and idiomatic markup. The i and b elements are considered typographic elements, not idiomatic ones (as em). So newer standards actually made them idiomatic.