Indeed. See also the bugs where these were set to use <b> and <i> https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=369 https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=370
And subsequent bugs asking for a change to <em> and <strong> which were marked as INVALID / WONTFIX. https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1038 https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7921 https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12550
Peter
On 30 November 2013 04:35, Bartosz Dziewoński matma.rex@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, 30 Nov 2013 13:22:20 +0100, max max@koehler-kn.de wrote:
I absolutely agree with your point. I wasn't aware that wiki-syntax
inserts in fact <i> tags (and also <b> tags, which bring up the same problems). That needs to be changed. We need clean, semantic markup in order to adjust the styling to any given circumstances, as you perfectly described.
This sucks, but it can't. The italics and bold weren't always used with the semantic meaning of giving emphasis (as I mentioned in my previous e-mail), so blindly replacing them with "semantic" tags and giving them false meanings would be a step back.
-- Matma Rex
Design mailing list Design@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design