BashChelik Posted January 10, 2010 Share Posted January 10, 2010 Hello fellow web designers!!!Can you tell me what is the difference between <em> and <i> tags, and also between <b> and <strong> tags? When i ask what difference is between them , i mean visually, since text looks all the same to me when i use them.Also tags <code>, <kbd>, <tt> and <sample> all show the same effect as i can notice.Can other people see any distinction between them? Best of luck,Mirko Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boen_robot Posted January 10, 2010 Share Posted January 10, 2010 You're right. They do look the same. They share the same default styles.The only difference they have is semantics. "em" implies emphasizing something, and "strong" implies saying something firmly (not necesarily emphasizing it). "i" and "b" are only about the visual difference, without the semantics in the speech.Screen readers are most affected by this difference, since they read the text out loud. They would read "i" and "b" with the same tone, whereas they'd change their tone for "em" and "strong". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BashChelik Posted January 10, 2010 Author Share Posted January 10, 2010 I was afraid someone will get me wrong. What i meant is that to me just <em> and <i> tags look the same.And just <b> and <strong> tags look the same. I didn't mean that all four look all the same. I edited my original post to add some more tags that look the same. So where is the point off making more tags with same visual effect when it can be combined into one?They made it for users who use programs like "loud reader" to compensate certain deficiency? Best of luck,Mirko Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BashChelik Posted January 10, 2010 Author Share Posted January 10, 2010 I have two new examples for this thread:<abbr> and <acronym> also have same effect and same meaning and do same things.English is not my mother language, so forgive me, but to me acronym and abbreviation have the same semantic sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thescientist Posted January 10, 2010 Share Posted January 10, 2010 I think it was meant as a way to add "tone" to a tag (i.e. strong, emphasis), as opposed to just visual representation, i.e. bold, italic. For those with screen readers and visual impairments, it will make a difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thescientist Posted January 10, 2010 Share Posted January 10, 2010 I have two new examples for this thread:<abbr> and <acronym> also have same effect and same meaning and do same things.English is not my mother language, so forgive me, but to me acronym and abbreviation have the same semantic sense.an abbreviation is writing something in short hand, and an acronym is short-handing a long term. I maybe off in my formal definition, lol, but these examples should clear it up.abbreviation: Organiziation = Org.acronym: Hyper Text Markup Language = HTML Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BashChelik Posted January 10, 2010 Author Share Posted January 10, 2010 I was afraid someone will get me wrong.I think I was here who misunderstood what you were saying boen_robot. Thx both of you for the info.Best of luck,Mirko Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dink Posted November 14, 2010 Share Posted November 14, 2010 Hello fellow web designers!!!Can you tell me what is the difference between <em> and <i> tags, and also between <b> and <strong> tags? When i ask what difference is between them , i mean visually, since text looks all the same to me when i use them.Also tags <code>, <kbd>, <tt> and <sample> all show the same effect as i can notice.Can other people see any distinction between them?Best of luck,Mirko I am not sure if your question ever got answered. The difference between <b> and <strong> is that <b> is depreciated or outdated the new way is <strong> At some point browsers will not recognize the <b> tag.The same is true for <i> and <em>Hope this helps a little.dink Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffman Posted November 14, 2010 Share Posted November 14, 2010 Holy cow, another thread dug up from the grave. OP hasn't even visited the board since February, so I doubt he's reading your answer.Your information, by the way, is terribly inadequate. Post #2 comes much closer to the truth. I wouldn't exactly call <em> and <strong> the "new way" since they have been around since at least 1995, which is as far back as I want to research this right now, and longer ago than most members of the board have been developing for the web.Also: <b> is alive and well in HTML4.01 and the unfinished HTML5 specification, so it will be with us for at least 10 more years, I am certain. To be fair, the spec does call <b> an element of "last resort," which it should be. But it is not deprecated. The argument has been made that it should be deprecated, but if that were in the plans, it would have happened by now.Lesson 1: Please do not dig up an old thread, unless it is your own. If a week has gone by, consider a thread a source of information, not a conversation to be continued.Lesson 2: It is better to provide no answer at all than an answer that is flat-out wrong or even just partially wrong. We are here to teach and learn. Many of our members are seasoned professionals, and many more are serious students advancing their careers. None of us has time for locker room wisdom. Please learn the difference between really knowing something and only thinking you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.