?

Log in

No account? Create an account
delirium happy

Just keep on trying till you run out of cake

Previous Entry Share Next Entry
(no subject)
delirium happy
rho
Pet hate of the day: when people writing in HTML (or pretty much any other computer format really) underline, eg, the title of a book. This sort of thing should be in italics, damnit. When writing longhand you underline it instead because actually writing in italics is pretty tough. But with HTML, you have italics available. Use it!

  • 1
According to most American English style guides, books are underlined and magazine titles are italicized.

When writing in what medium? I have never seen underlining used in this way in any sort of professionally published printed medium or website. Could be that what is considered stylisticly correct is different in Britain, but it seems very odd to me.

Hm, you're right -- sorta.

New York Times uses quotation marks:
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/07/books/review/07HOLT.html

So does Salon:
http://dir.salon.com/books/review/2000/04/06/rashid/index.html

It makes perfect sense. If they're underlined, folks will read them as links.


(Deleted comment)
I tend to write longhand in italics and put book title/emphasis in non-italics...

Hee! I so agree with you.

It does make sense to use actual italics to italicise something, but I was taught in elementary school (Grade 7 specifically) to underline book titles in every medium, including print, and only use italics for titles of plays, etc. Even now, I'm required to underline book titles in (print) bibliographies/works cited.

Perhaps it is a cultural difference?

Re: interesting...

As I mentioned to mactavish I have never seen underlining used to denote a title in any form of print medium. It may be a cultural difference, or it may just be that I don't read all that much stuff that has bibliographies in it.

Oh, and I think that underlined text looks ugly anyway :)

Oh no you don't...

(Anonymous)
You use the <cite> tag. IE renders this as italics.

Why cite and not just use <i>? That's not an argument I want to get into. Surfice to say it's the Right Thing.

Re: Oh no you don't...

(Anonymous)
*ahem* in case you hadn't guessed, That was Aquarion...

Re: Oh no you don't...

Aquarion wrote:

You use the <cite> tag.

Point conceeded. And having been to look up the exact usage of the <cite> tag on w3c.org I also learned about the <q> and <abbr> tags. So I'm happy now.

(I wonder how many mistakes I made in the HTML there)

  • 1