A formatting question that may sound strange to you

[satyr]

Well, I really don't know if this is the right section, but I couldn't find a better one. Anyways, I must also confess that this thread is most probably the "result" of my obsessive pedantry, and the result of me being a kind of a "formatting maniac" ...


For instance, consider my software.html page. As you can see, in all cases where I link to some program's website, I use the colon character after the "strong" closing/ending tag. But the thing is that on the very same page, I also use it the other way, i.e. use the colon char before the closing tag so that it's itself bold too.


The example of one such program's link:

... <strong>BartPE</strong>: <a href="http://www.nu2.nu/pebuilder" onclick="target='_blank';">http://www.nu2.nu/pebuilder</a> ...

The example of one such navigational text:

<strong>My various blogs:</strong>

<strong>TinyURL:</strong>

<strong>Disclaimer 1:</strong>

So since I am a "formatting maniac" (i.e. I like things to be "consistent" through the whole site/page), I've decided to use the same formatting in both cases (i.e. in case of programs and these navigational etc. texts), therefore I am curious: by various written or un-written design standards, which option from the two is better, and which one would you prefer personally.


thanks in advance, satyr

[BPartch]

I voted before the closing tag. It seems more appropriate than after to me and that is my personal taste. I am not sure if one way is more correct than the other.

[Tyssen]

I think from a semantic point of view it should be after the tag as the bit you're emphasising is the text, not the fact that there's a separation between one part of the sentence and the next (unless you think the separation itself is worth emphasising, but even then my opinion would be that it's a different sort of emphasis to the one placed on the text itself).
However, from a visual point of view, I think the colon looks better if it is in bold due to the fact that there's no space between the bold text and the colon but there is between the colon and the non-bold text.

[C. Ankerstjerne]

I voted 'before'. The reason is, that the colon substitutes a period. If a sentence was bold, and contained a period, the period should be bold as well, since it's a part of the sentence.

[satyr]

Thanks much all for your replies !!


satyr

[zcorpan]

Originally Posted by C. Ankerstjerne

I voted 'before'. The reason is, that the colon substitutes a period. If a sentence was bold, and contained a period, the period should be bold as well, since it's a part of the sentence.

+1.

[sonjay]

It sounds like you've got a good consensus, but I just wanted to add that in conventional typography, the rule has always been that (with few exceptions) punctuation following text that's bolded, italicized, etc., takes the formatting of the text preceeding it.

I disremember the few exceptions, but it's a pretty safe rule of thumb: an italic word followed by a comma -- the comma is italic. Bold word followed by a period -- the period is bold. And so forth.

[Dan Schulz]

Originally Posted by sonjay

It sounds like you've got a good consensus, but I just wanted to add that in conventional typography, the rule has always been that (with few exceptions) punctuation following text that's bolded, italicized, etc., takes the formatting of the text preceeding it.

I disremember the few exceptions, but it's a pretty safe rule of thumb: an italic word followed by a comma -- the comma is italic. Bold word followed by a period -- the period is bold. And so forth.

That's what I do as well.

[satyr]

Well, and now I got so many different opinions that I am even more confused, lol ...


greetings, satyr

[sonjay]

No no ... we're all (well, almost all) saying the same thing! The punctuation -- the colon, in this case -- "belongs to" the preceeding text, therefore it should take on the same style as the preceeding text.

[Dan Schulz]

Four out of five people agree that <strong>text:</strong> is the proper usage here.

[satyr]

By the way guys, this particular NogDog's post on the WebDeveloper forums is very interesting, i.e. he pasted some related "formatting rules" from the Chicago Manual of Style, as stated on the linked page, they are "The bible of the publishing and research ...".


satyr

[satyr]

Originally Posted by sonjay

No no ... we're all (well, almost all) saying the same thing! The punctuation -- the colon, in this case -- "belongs to" the preceeding text, therefore it should take on the same style as the preceeding text.

Oh you know, I meant also on other forums where I asked this particular question, to get as much different opinions as possible !!


satyr

[sonjay]

The Chicago Manual section is what I was (vaguely) remembering in my earlier post. As that excerpt shows, it explicitly states "periods, commas, colons, and semicolons should appear in the same font as the word, letter, character, or symbol immediately preceding them if different from that of the main or surrounding text." You can't get much clearer than that.

[C. Ankerstjerne]

Don't listen to what they say at other forums. This forum is better

[satyr]

Originally Posted by sonjay

The Chicago Manual section is what I was (vaguely) remembering in my earlier post. As that excerpt shows, it explicitly states "periods, commas, colons, and semicolons should appear in the same font as the word, letter, character, or symbol immediately preceding them if different from that of the main or surrounding text." You can't get much clearer than that.

Well, as you can see from this particular NogDog's reply in a same thread that I opened on WebDeveloper forums, it seems that the linked "Chicago Manual" article isn't so certain about which form is "correct", or more "appropriate".


satyr