D.M. Procida arranged shapes to form:
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Print has managed very well by using italics for book titles and foreign
>>> words, and it is a convention which has endured. Italics doesn't always
>>> look too nice on-screen though. What do people prefer to use for this
>> In my opinion, this is a matter of what fonts are being used, as well as the
>> default font size. This needs careful testing under many Web browsers and
>> platforms however. I sometimes prefer to inherit bits of CSS from sites that
>> have done all that cross-browser/platform work /already/, e.g.:
> That's not really the question I was asking, but I think I asked it
> quite badly.
> When we see something in italics in print, we can recognise it
> (depending upon the context) as the title of a book or journal, or as a
> foreign word (or emphasis of course, but we have a <em> already.)
> That is, italics have a semantic function in print; they tells us to
> expect words with a particular kind of meaning or purpose. (Actually,
> it's switching between regular and italic text which is the clue,
> because if a run of text is already in italics, then using regular text
> indicates emphasis/a title/foreign word.)
> <i> tends to produce unattractive text on-screen.
> <cite> seems to be acceptable for titles, but there is nothing
> equivalent for foreign words.
Use the lang attribute inside a logical tag and
> And, there is still the question about the
> on-screen typography for (say) <cite>, if italics don't please.
What are you marking up? if it's academic, then use the standard
conventions - and expect people to print it out to read it! Also, what
typeface are you using? Not all types have proper italics, so shouldn't be
> Perhaps I will just use <cite> for titles and <span class="furrin"> for
> foreign words.
Makes sense, but use a lang attribute as well, to tell the machines!