[uf-discuss] a very early draft proposal hTagcloud

[Ben Ward]

On 20 Sep 2006, at 10:45, Matthew Levine wrote:
> However, I'm not whether I like exploiting nesting order. It feels  
> a bit hackish, and isn't as semantically unambiguous as Ben's  
> initial example.

Yeah, I considered EM > STRONG and STRONG > EM as well but as you  
say, it's very hackish and in my interpretation of the semantics I  
come to one of two conclusions:

* Either EM > STRONG and STRONG > EM are equal, so couldn't represent  
different levels
or
* EM > STRONG is semantically invalid as ‘Strong emphasis’ is greater  
than ‘Emphasis’. It seems very wrong that EM can be the parent of  
another element which describes a larger, bigger application of the  
same semantic… unless we were to make EM inherit semantics from the  
little known TARDIS element.

Ben