6 ms·

It really annoys me that services can't decide if * is bold or italics. It makes the most sense to me as italics, so when I use whatsapp or youtube I always get

• cwillu 2y ago
  I can't comprehend why * wouldn't be bold. Given that underlining is how you italics when you can't italics, _ makes perfect sense.
  • digging 2y ago
    > Given that underlining is how you italics when you can't italics In my experience underlining is how you bold when you can't bold.
    • JoshTriplett 2y ago
      In my experience, underscores are how you underline when you can't underline. Asterisks are emphasis, which is typically italics.
      • kccqzy 2y ago
        That's completely true, but emphasis is normally rendered by italics too. (See for example the <em> element in HTML with the default CSS.) Emphasis is the semantic, italics is the presentation. From this perspective both underscores and single asterisks should render into italics.
        • JoshTriplett 2y ago
          > emphasis is normally rendered by italics too I wasn't disagreeing with that; edited my comment to be clear. Asterisks are emphasis; emphasis is typically italics. I do think that underscores should have been underlining, but unfortunately that's not what Markdown chose.
      • glenngillen 2y ago
        > are how you underline when you can't underline Underscores/underline were a hint on a manuscript to the typesetter that you wanted italic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underscore https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underscore). It later became a way to add emphasis (either italic or bold styling) on typewriters as there wasn't a practical way to have bold and italic versions of every character on a mechanical typewriter. Most professionally typeset content (i.e., optimised for legibility through years of experience rather than just whatever your word processor will allow) will not contain underlined content (https://practicaltypography.com/underlining.html https://practicaltypography.com/underlining.html).
    • cwillu 2y ago
      FWIW, https://style.mla.org/underscore-instead-of-italics/ https://style.mla.org/underscore-instead-of-italics/
      • JadeNB 2y ago
        > In handwritten and typewritten material—where italics are impossible to render—titles of works normally italicized, words used as words, and letters used as letters are underlined: What in the world does "words used as words" mean?
        • cwillu 2y ago
          “What in the world does _words_used_as_words_ mean?” would be a valid way of formatting that question according to the guide: that's what they mean.
          • JadeNB 2y ago
            > “What in the world does _words_used_as_words_ mean?” would be a valid way of formatting that question according to the guide: that's what they mean. I think you are answering my question, but I still don't understand. How else than as words would words be used? Are you saying that the underlining here is serving the purpose of quotation marks?
        • yencabulator 2y ago
          When you are for example referring to some word or phrase instead of trying to use it in its normal place in the grammar of a sentence. Mean can have many meanings. You may be more familiar using quotes for that. https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/qanda/data/faq/topics/NoneoftheAbove/faq0012.html https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/qanda/data/faq/topics/N...
          • JadeNB 2y ago
            Ah, thank you.
    • gowld 2y ago
      CAPS is how you bold when you can't bold.
      • digging 2y ago
        Funny of you to say that so authoritatively when you're only demonstrating my point: there is no one correct way to replace bold text when you can't use bold text.
      • deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      • biztos 2y ago
        For decades (centuries?) in German, s p a c i n g was how you “bolded” (or italicized) when your typesetter couldn’t. Very elegant solution once your eye adjusts to it.
  • SllX 2y ago
    I’ve been using Markdown since 2006 and for me it’s always been: *emphasis* (i.e. italic) **strong emphasis** (i.e. bold) You can use underscores in exactly the same way, but the reason I’ve stuck purely to asterisks is that it’s just slightly easier to type and I think it’s slightly more readable when I’m reading an un-rendered Markdown document, so I appreciate the syntax that John Gruber chose here.
  • mock-possum 2y ago
    Underlining always looks like hyperlinks now.
• zo1 2y ago
  * was to bold or to emphasize stuff way before markdown was even a thing. That's how I remember the early days of the web in the early 0's.
  • Fomite 2y ago
    I think the issue is "bold *or* emphasize". There's not a universal consensus on whether or not emphasis is italics or bold.
• eyjafjallajokul 2y ago
  See also: Imperial v/s Metric. :-)