12971 2011-06-16 17:02:59 +0000 A lot of times, perhaps the majority of the time, authors use or to make text italic or bold, when in fact the intention has nothing to do with emphasizing or strongly emphasizing the text. The result is terrible in aural browsers and extrem 2011-08-04 05:35:53 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified HTML WG LC1 HTML5 spec unspecified Other other RESOLVED WORKSFORME http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#top a11y P3 normal --- 1 contributor ian ayg brunoaiss html5bugs jackalmage laura.lee.carlson mike public-html-a11y public-html-admin public-html-wg-issue-tracking public-html-bugzilla oldest_to_newest 49692 0 contributor 2011-06-16 17:02:59 +0000 Specification: http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html Section: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#top Comment: A lot of times, perhaps the majority of the time, authors use or to make text italic or bold, when in fact the intention has nothing to do with emphasizing or strongly emphasizing the text. The result is terrible in aural browsers and extremely hard to understand. Is there any way this practice could be discouraged, other than reintroducing and which can be ignored by an aural browser? People just don't understand that doesn't mean italic and doesn't mean bold. Posted from: 70.166.227.119 User agent: Opera/9.80 (Windows NT 6.1; U; en) Presto/2.8.131 Version/11.11 49693 1 jackalmage 2011-06-16 17:12:32 +0000 We *did* reintroduce and , partly to address this very problem. 49715 2 ayg 2011-06-16 18:26:49 +0000 (In reply to comment #0) > A lot of times, perhaps the majority of the time, authors use or > to make text italic or bold, when in fact the intention has nothing to do with > emphasizing or strongly emphasizing the text. The result is terrible in aural > browsers and extremely hard to understand. What aural browsers did you test in? When I tested in JAWS some time ago, it ignored and . Is there some resource that explains various screen-readers' support for various HTML tags in practice? > Is there any way this practice could be discouraged, other than reintroducing > and which can be ignored by an aural browser? They already have been introduced. 49718 3 html5bugs 2011-06-16 18:28:16 +0000 OK, then as far as I am concerned this bug is closed. Books and instructional material have become very adamant about avoiding and at all costs, but this solution is perfectly satisfactory to me. For sure using and , according to the guidelines of the 16 June 2011 working draft, is a lot better than using and when the semantic meaning of emphasis is not applicable. 54084 4 mike 2011-08-04 05:35:53 +0000 mass-move component to LC1