Urgent help please, record commands?

"P@tty Ayers ~ACE" <signup1REMOVE (AT) ayersvirtualREMOVE (DOT) com> wrote

"murdod" <webforumsuser (AT) macromedia (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:g678f6$1lh$1 (AT) forums (DOT) macromedia.com...
[b] has been deprecated so for strict pages it will not validate ...

Company I work for insists all [b] are replaced with <span
class="strong"

Whoever told you that doesn't know what he's talking about. He's right
that <b> is deprecated,

My apologies - <b> actdually *isn't* deprecated. But it's non-semantic
markup, and <strong> should be used instead for marking up text which you
intend to be emphasized strongly (and rendered in boldface).


--
Patty Ayers | www.WebDevBiz.com
Free Articles on the Business of Web Development
Web Design Contract, Estimate Request Form, Estimate Worksheet
--

Where did you get [b] from ?? I never said [b] was deprecated ??

I said [b] was deprecated .....................

LOL. When you post from the webforum and we read from the NNTP forum, <b>
becomes [b].

<b> is not deprecated. Your source is batty. Check the DW REFERENCE panel
for information about <b> -

"Although this element is not deprecated in HTML 4 or XHTML 1.0, it would
not be surprising to see it lose favor to stylesheets in the future"

I even take issue with that statement but that's another thread, and would
depend entirely on the "SENSE" in which the <b> tag is used. For those
cases where it's used to convey only a visual design motif, and not a SPOKEN
enhancement, then it would be perfectly accurate to continue using <b>.

--
Murray --- ICQ 71997575
Adobe Community Expert
(If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!)
==================
http://www.projectseven.com/go - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
http://www.dwfaq.com - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
==================


"murdod" <webforumsuser (AT) macromedia (DOT) com> wrote

Where did you get [b] from ?? I never said [b] was deprecated ??

I said [b] was deprecated .....................

Please stop telling me < b > ( BOLD ) is not deprecated. I am not thick.

I am not replacing BOLD with < span class .. I am replacing:

< strong > ( STRONG )

<strong> is not deprecated, either. And replacing <strong> with <span
style="font-weight:bold"> (or any other such) is making your pages less
usable/user friendly.

I think the whole project is unnecessary - sounds like 'make work' to me.

--
Murray --- ICQ 71997575
Adobe Community Expert
(If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!)
==================
http://www.projectseven.com/go - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
http://www.dwfaq.com - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
==================


"murdod" <webforumsuser (AT) macromedia (DOT) com> wrote

Please stop telling me < b > ( BOLD ) is not deprecated. I am not
thick.

I am not replacing BOLD with < span class .. I am replacing:

strong > ( STRONG )

"murdod" <webforumsuser (AT) macromedia (DOT) com> wrote

I am not replacing BOLD with < span class .. I am replacing:

strong > ( STRONG )

So you're replacing good, clean, valid code <strong> with an unnecessary
extra <span> and CSS class. Ok, it's a free country.

--
Patty Ayers | www.WebDevBiz.com
Free Articles on the Business of Web Development
Web Design Contract, Estimate Request Form, Estimate Worksheet
--

"Murray *ACE*" <forums (AT) HAHAgreat-web-sights (DOT) com> wrote

...would depend entirely on the "SENSE" in which the <b> tag is used. For
those cases where it's used to convey only a visual design motif, and not a
SPOKEN enhancement, then it would be perfectly accurate to continue using
b>.

But Murray, that goes completely against the concept of separation of
presentation from structure. If the desired outcome is just that certain
text be boldfaced, that's a matter of styling and should be done with CSS.
HTML tags are for marking up the text as to its role in the structure of the
document, remember? :-)

--
Patty Ayers | www.WebDevBiz.com
Free Articles on the Business of Web Development
Web Design Contract, Estimate Request Form, Estimate Worksheet
--

It's a valid tag. And the cosmetic appearance is really not a part of the
function.

--
Murray --- ICQ 71997575
Adobe Community Expert
(If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!)
==================
http://www.projectseven.com/go - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
http://www.dwfaq.com - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
==================


"P@tty Ayers ~ACE" <signup1REMOVE (AT) ayersvirtualREMOVE (DOT) com> wrote

"Murray *ACE*" <forums (AT) HAHAgreat-web-sights (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:g67ijt$chk$1 (AT) forums (DOT) macromedia.com...

...would depend entirely on the "SENSE" in which the <b> tag is used. For
those cases where it's used to convey only a visual design motif, and not
a SPOKEN enhancement, then it would be perfectly accurate to continue
using <b>.

But Murray, that goes completely against the concept of separation of
presentation from structure. If the desired outcome is just that certain
text be boldfaced, that's a matter of styling and should be done with CSS.
HTML tags are for marking up the text as to its role in the structure of
the document, remember? :-)

--
Patty Ayers | www.WebDevBiz.com
Free Articles on the Business of Web Development
Web Design Contract, Estimate Request Form, Estimate Worksheet
--

..oO(P@tty Ayers ~ACE)

"Murray *ACE*" <forums (AT) HAHAgreat-web-sights (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:g67ijt$chk$1 (AT) forums (DOT) macromedia.com...

...would depend entirely on the "SENSE" in which the <b> tag is used. For
those cases where it's used to convey only a visual design motif, and not a
SPOKEN enhancement, then it would be perfectly accurate to continue using
b>.

But Murray, that goes completely against the concept of separation of
presentation from structure. If the desired outcome is just that certain
text be boldfaced, that's a matter of styling and should be done with CSS.
HTML tags are for marking up the text as to its role in the structure of the
document, remember? :-)

<b></b>: 7 chars
<span class="b"></span>: 23 chars

;-)

In this case I also use 'b'/'i' if the purpose is purely presentational.

Micha

Valid, but it doesn't separate presentation from structure. I'm not sure
what you mean by "the cosmetic appearance is really not a part of the
function" - with <b>, there's nothing BUT cosmetic appearance. It has no
semantic meaning, only a presentational meaning.

If validity of code is your highest priority, then, sure, there's no problem
using it.

--
Patty Ayers | www.WebDevBiz.com
Free Articles on the Business of Web Development
Web Design Contract, Estimate Request Form, Estimate Worksheet
--


"Murray *ACE*" <forums (AT) HAHAgreat-web-sights (DOT) com> wrote

It's a valid tag. And the cosmetic appearance is really not a part of the
function.

--
Murray --- ICQ 71997575
Adobe Community Expert
(If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!)
==================
http://www.projectseven.com/go - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
http://www.dwfaq.com - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
==================


"P@tty Ayers ~ACE" <signup1REMOVE (AT) ayersvirtualREMOVE (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:g67tdm$plt$1 (AT) forums (DOT) macromedia.com...

"Murray *ACE*" <forums (AT) HAHAgreat-web-sights (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:g67ijt$chk$1 (AT) forums (DOT) macromedia.com...

...would depend entirely on the "SENSE" in which the <b> tag is used.
For those cases where it's used to convey only a visual design motif, and
not a SPOKEN enhancement, then it would be perfectly accurate to continue
using <b>.

But Murray, that goes completely against the concept of separation of
presentation from structure. If the desired outcome is just that certain
text be boldfaced, that's a matter of styling and should be done with
CSS. HTML tags are for marking up the text as to its role in the
structure of the document, remember? :-)

--
Patty Ayers | www.WebDevBiz.com
Free Articles on the Business of Web Development
Web Design Contract, Estimate Request Form, Estimate Worksheet
--