Re: My favorite HTML font style tag is...

TacoVendor beat me to the <blink> joke, so i'll have to be serious. I voted for <tt>, because until i started hanging out at the Monastery, i never used this tag. I like to use it in my posts to markup CPAN modules, subroutines, methods, and variables, as long as i don't have to use the [ or < symbols (which require escaping or 'inline' <code> tags). Here is an example.

That's why i like [cpan://Time::Piece]. Not only is it a
drop-in replacement for <tt>localtime</tt> and
<tt>gmtime</tt>, <tt>Time::Piece</tt> also ...
[download]

Pesonally, i think the extra typing is worth it, but some might claim it's not being lazy. ;)

jeffa

L-LL-L--L-LL-L--L-LL-L--
-R--R-RR-R--R-RR-R--R-RR
B--B--B--B--B--B--B--B--
H---H---H---H---H---H---
(the triplet paradiddle with high-hat)

Comment on Re: My favorite HTML font style tag is... Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: My favorite HTML font style tag is... by theAcolyte (Pilgrim) on Aug 20, 2003 at 05:17 UTC
I'm a nitpicker. I admit it. Since you're using <tt> to show emphasis, you should really use <EM> </EM> and then use your stylesheet to make your EM equivalent to teletype. - Erik --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Promoting web standards since 3 PM today.	[reply]
3Re: My favorite HTML font style tag is... by jeffa (Bishop) on Aug 20, 2003 at 13:47 UTC
Why? What's the difference. I am sure that there is a good one, but i don't understand why you just say "you should this!" without explaining why. Also, if you were a nitpicker then you would have said "use `<em>` tags" instead, because that's the XHTML way (all lower cased elements). Letsee, i just tested this html: `<p>this is <i>italic</i></p> <p>this is <em>emphasis</em></p> <p>this is <tt>teletype</tt></p>` [download] and viewed it with lynx, which 'rendered' the `<i>` and `<em>` tags, but not the `<tt>` tag. If this is what you were referring to, then yes, i should switch. But i probably won't. ;) jeffa L-LL-L--L-LL-L--L-LL-L-- -R--R-RR-R--R-RR-R--R-RR B--B--B--B--B--B--B--B-- H---H---H---H---H---H--- (the triplet paradiddle with high-hat)	[reply] [d/l]
Re: 3Re: My favorite HTML font style tag is... by theAcolyte (Pilgrim) on Aug 20, 2003 at 21:28 UTC
Ya, my XHTML is garbage, thanks for reminding me. The reason for using <em> over <i> or <b> in this situation is the idea of structure vs. presentation. In an ideal world, your HTML would only mark up your content structurally ... <em> rather then <i> or <b> for emphasis <code> rather then <pre> for mono-spaced code <h1> for a headline instead of <font> Why bother, you ask? (Well, even if you don't....) Because not all devices that render HTML pages are visual -- example, if someone is looking at your page on a Palm Pilot, then the palm can interpret emphasis the best way it can. Also, search engines are better equiped to deal with structural markup -- markup that signifies what type of data something is. Once you can do all your mark-up structurally, you can use CSS to have your HTML visually styled in the user-agents that can handle it, and the ones that can't will still be able to digest it easily.	[reply]


"be consistent"
	PerlMonks