Re: Ox-html: Replace <b> with <strong> and <i> with <em>

[Tim Cross <theophilusx@gmail.com>]

Kaushal Modi <kaushal.modi@gmail.com> writes:

> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 2:04 AM Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr> wrote:
>>
>>
>> No objection from me. Thank you!
>
> Actually, before making this change, I started reading up on the HTML5
> spec on the b, strong, i, em tags, and now I am confused as ever.
>
> Facts:
>
> - b and i are not deprecated
> - b and strong are both valid but their use depends on the writer's
> context (but Org mode has just one mark for either "*")
> - i and em are both valid but their use depends on the writer's
> context (but Org mode has just one mark for either "/").
>
> From "em" docs[em], in the NOTE section there:
>
>> The em element isn’t a generic "italics" element. Sometimes, text is intended to stand out from the rest of the paragraph, as if it was in a different mood or voice. For this, the i element is more appropriate.
>
> See the b tag docs[b] and i tag docs[i], and this W3C FAQ on using b
> and i tags[faq] for more.
>
>
> *Summary* (/see what I did there?/):
>
> I guess there's no need to change what "*" and "/" do right now in
> ox-html, as there doesn't seem "one right way" to do things here.
>
> And folks strongly wanting to use <strong> and <em> for bold and
> italic can customize org-html-text-markup-alist.
>
> HTML experts, please chime in.
>
>
>
> [em]: https://www.w3.org/TR/html5/textlevel-semantics.html#the-em-element
> [b]: https://www.w3.org/TR/html5/textlevel-semantics.html#the-b-element
> [i]: https://www.w3.org/TR/html5/textlevel-semantics.html#the-i-element
> [faq]: https://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-b-and-i-tags

I'll start by stating I'm definitely not an HTML expert.

I do believe we should move away from b/i to strong/em as I think these
are the correct semantic tags to use and are generally what is
preferred. This means they are also likely to already have appropriate
'styling' in many 'canned' styles and valid consistent interpretations
for different media types. 

The problem with b and i is that they specify how rather than what and
don't always make sense for all possible media types. For example, what
does 'bold' or 'italic' mean for a screen reader?

I don't think this is something that is urgent, but it is the direction
we should go. The only real reason for sooner rather than later is that
we can probably simplify some of the exporters and ensure any new
exporters are correct and won't need to be change retrospectively.

Tim

-- 
Tim Cross