Tips for using HTML small tag_HTML/Xhtml_Web page production

Phrasal elements like can improve document structure while retaining the intended visual style. But is not very common in daily applications. The first impression is whether Taobao UED has neglected this small issue?

Regarding , the results of online searches are also fragmented. Some say that it is not recommended to use, and some do not mention its name in the abandoned tags. Fortunately, this is explained in detail in the book "Mastering HTML Semantics, Standards and Styles".

, like

---

<sup><sub><i><b> and other brothers, are defined as presentational elements. The W3C says: To be able to simply Element that specifies font information, no semantics. For example: <b> tag, there is no doubt that it should be replaced with <em> or <strong>; but <i> tag, it is difficult to directly express it when you want to italicize a foreign text in the page (the convention of foreign language display) There is nothing wrong with using it, because when the user uses <span class="">...</span> to express a paragraph in italics, it takes up much more space than the former. <br><br>As for the more complex <big><small>, the author of the book, Paul Haine, did not give a clear answer. Theoretically, they are purely presentational elements and should be removed using CSS. replace them. But some heavyweight in the industry (Joe Clark) recommends using them to achieve "weighted by importance" visuals. The result of the discussion is: there are gains and losses, and specific issues need to be analyzed in detail. <br><br>Back to this piece of code on Taobao, within the <small></small> tag is a link to skip navigation: <a class="invisible" href="#Content">Skip navigation and toolbar</a>. I think Taobao UED adopted the same idea as the <i> tag after thinking about it. Instead of defining a <span class="skipNavigation"></span> that takes up a lot of html space, it is better to use <small> directly. The more important point is that the skip navigation function is for users, to be precise, it is for disabled users when using a read-aloud browser or without css style definition. The concise <small></small> may be more in line with standardization. spirit. <br><br>The only doubt is that the <small> under css streaking is indeed the following one-size font, showing its original meaning of non-importance. But for blind users, does changing <small></small> to <strong></strong> optimize the user experience for reading-aloud browsers? <br></small></small></i></small></big></i></strong></em></b></b></i></sub></sup>