Well I know it’s not evil just not as pretty in semantics as <strong> and <em> right?
However, with <b> becoming more semantic as <strong> and <i> as <em>, why isn’t there a semantic twin for <u>?
In styling:
So there’s a CSS style text-decoration:underline for <u>, but isn’t there one font-weight:bold for <strong> already? Thus goes <em> too.
In semantics:
<strong> is semantic for what? Strongly emphasized text? <em> is semantic for what? Emphasized text? Anything fundamentally different from each other and mutually exclusive? No. Why can’t there be another way to emphasize text? You know, like the way <u> does and makes up a semantic twin for it too – I guess it’s just <strong> and <em> are already well implemented in all major browsers before the <b> and <i> become obselete.
I know, now that it’s officially become standards, you just have to go with it. Or please have your say: is there a compelling reason to make <u> out of view?
It gets mistaken for a hyperlink.