Ive seen a lot of these tags on websites what does it mean and when is it best used? </strong>word</strong> Thanks Jamie
i'm not sure, i don't think so...it just bolds the text..it's part of text formatting i think you're thinking of the header tags <h1><h2><h3></h3></h2></h1>, etc
Officially (I think) <b> is not supported anymore, <strong></strong> is recommended instead. But it's such a pain to write that out I stuck with <b>'s.
i've always wondered that... and i'm guessing <Em></Em> is the succesfor for <i></i> but i'm just so used to them, and they still work unfortunately <blink> doesn't anymore
What's amazing about the "amazing web design" link you display is that none of the sites listed in the "portfolio" are real. Gee I wonder where they might have come from. The "client responses" reflecting continued rejection of the "amazing web designs" are laughable too, and it's also clear where those came from.
they're not real, they're just layouts. i think you're psycho. that's the one he's done for me, logo's going to change though
No, I'm a professional who has called out a neophyte charlatan -- someone who is trying to pass off works as something they are not, complete with fake clients comments on said fake works. Now -- who is the psycho? I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are just naive and not well schooled in right from wrong, so here's a free hint: label your the works as personal experiments, and lose the fake "client" representational comments. Goodbye and good luck.
that's not my work btw but if it's true, do you have proof? because i've worked with this person and his talents match what he show on the site *shrug*
I beleive the STRONG tag is favored over the B tag. Apparently B is deprecated or will be in the near future. Same for EM being preferred over I. S
The W3C is trying to differentiate between what data is and how it should look. When the document's structure and the document's design and two separate concepts you end up with a page that is much more maintainable and adaptable to change. This is accomplished by using HTML exclusively for describing the document's structure, and style sheets for describing its design. That being said, STRONG is not a replacement for B, and EM is not a replacement for I. Bold and italic do not describe what data is. Is it italic because it is an address, because a word should be emphasized, or perhaps because it just looks nicer? We don't know. But if we use HTML for describing data—EM for marking emphasis, or ADDRESS for marking an address—then we can describe explicitly what would be implicit in print. There is also no reason why EM must be italic, or STRONG must be bold. If we have used these elements as they were meant to be used—for making emphasis and stronger emphasis—then we can later decide how we want them to look in our style sheet. Maybe we want emphasized text to be underlined. Maybe we want strongly emphasized text to be in all capitals and red. Since our HTML document has told us what the data is then we can now decide how we want each kind of information to look.
<b> and <strong> are not the same, not by a longshot. The end result of the two may be the same, but they serve entirely different functions. This goes for <i> and <em> too. <b> is meant to make text bold. <strong> is meant to declare a portion of text to be stronger than the text surrounding it. What's the difference you might ask? Well <b> decides for the end user what the text will look like, but <strong> tell the end user that it is ok to experience strength in whatever way (s)he sees fit. For 99% of the browsing community, this will result in text being bolded, but that's due to browser defaults, not because the page mandated it. For example, someone using a browser with screen reader might set up a user-controlled style sheet to express strength with a louder voice. But bold would have little meaning. Yes, that same person could set up the reader to understand <b>, but the point behind this shift is to move away from style tags and toward structural tags when you are truly attempting to define a structural aspect of your content. <b> styles text. <strong> lends itself to the heirarchy for text to which it is applied within a larger context. The same thing goes for <em>. The chances that using <b> instead of <strong> within your code will have any impact on the end user are miniscule at best, but good coding practice is to apply strength, not bolding. If you want to define strength as something bold, apply strong { font-weight:bold } within your style sheet. Using the right element allows alternative browsing devices to be made to react to structural tags and allows style tags to be dropped (or used in different circumstances, like bibliographical listings). Edit: Crap. I just read FeelLikeANut's reply. I damned near copied right off of him