Hi Tedd, How's it going? I'm very pleased with the emphasis on accessibility you bring to the PHP list, but I do believe you're overstating a few points below. > So, allow me to bring mine -- my information/position stems from my > understanding derived from both daily practice and constant reading. In > addition to reading links like the above (which I read btw), I also read > several list provided by disability concerns, such as " > webdev.lists.d.umn.edu" being the best. In addition to all that, I also > read several technical books each week re these subjects. > I'm thankful you've had the chance to inform your perspective on development. > For example, within this last month I've purchased and read HTML5 by > Lawson, Smashing CSS by Meyer, 100 Things by Weinschenk, Learning Web Design > by Robbins, Designing with the Mind in Mind by Johnson, Forms that work by > Jarret, Build your own web site the right way by Lloyd, PHP 5.3 by Doyle, > and Expert PHP and MySQL by Cuniosoa. That's a lot of reading, -- so I > think I keep up with what's going on. > Of the above books, which actually speaks to semantically appropriate markup, and of that subset, which actually references the rationale for the change in semantics of the <b> tag? And, of that subset, which argues against using the <b> and <i> tags as recommended in the editors draft? I know that the Lawson book you mentioned references the <b> tag on 59, but it does not disparage it's use (rather, it provides an example of the appropriate use under (X)HTML5.) So that source would seem to support the use of the <b> when semantically appropriate, just as Pilgram's book does. The rest of the list does show you've read a fair amount in the past month (just as others on this list, including me), but what does it do to specifically support your argument? > While it is true that html5 brought back tags such as <b> and <i>, but it > has also brought back <table> for presentation. I leave the reader (and the > future) to judge the wisdom of that decision. > The discussion is not about the table element's role attribute in (X)HTML5, the discussion was centered on the specific change to the meaning of the <b> tag. Even if the table tag implementation is questionable, that does not mean all of the new semantics for the <b> are questionable. Each feature stands on its own merits. > I think we all realize the problems that these tags bring to the table (no > pun intended). We can either continue to resolve the problems they present > or we can resort back to the way things were. > Again, the <table> tag was not the discussion. How would you markup text that should be "stylistically offset from the normal prose without conveying any extra importance...?" You could choose to use a span tag. However, I would, following the W3C quote above, choose to use the <b> tag as HTML5 becomes better supported. > As for me, I choose to never use <b> and <i> for anything PERIOD and to > speak out against their use whenever I can. As for <table> in presentation, > I am still undecided. While I would never use tables for the presentation of > text, I often use simple tables (i.e., no nesting) for holding forms > together. However, I am leaning toward not using tables for that either. > I believe you have some <b> tags in your site. The world is changing and I don't think any organization can dictate what is > the right/wrong way to do anything. But the good thing here is that we are > left to our own judgement as to what we support and what we condemn. In my > judgment, the <b> and <i> tags present more problems than they solve so I > will continue to not use those tags and speak against them. Our own judgement AND the standards set out there by the community of professional web developers. The W3C is clearly moving to standardizing a new use for the <b> and <i> tags, and I will try to follow the standard, as other software developers (including those who develop screen readers) will do to try and improve the user experience. Again, I greatly respect you, Ted, I have learned much from your posts, and this discussion does not detract from that. However, I want to make sure the developers subscribing to the list will consider the use of the <i> and <b> tags as recommended by the W3C in (X)HTML5. Adam -- Nephtali: A simple, flexible, fast, and security-focused PHP framework http://nephtaliproject.com
