deleted
replyEh, it's fine, elements should be defined for what they mean, not what they look like. The explanation and distinctions made between <b> and other elements (<i>, <em>, <strong>) make sense.
replyThe suggested (not obligatory) user agent styling for <b> is `font-weight: bolder` an agent or authors could use lots of different things to bring attention to what the element contains and treat it differently from <strong>.
https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/text-level-semantics....
https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/rendering.html#phrasi...
I write most of my content in markdown or asciidoc and I don't pay attention to whether it's b or strong :)
replyIn practice today, that's fine. Typically authors have a hard time differentiating what "emphasis," "importance," and "bring attention to" mean to them. Therefore, nothing conveys a distinction by default.
replySo then what's the point of making this distinction? I would like to see surveys of how many people actually author content in forms that differentiate between b and strong.
replyWhat, you don't know what's the difference between "emphasis" and "bringing attention to"? Shame on you, shame on you: you're unworthy to write HTML.
replyThe difference, of course, is that one is a Latin word, and the other is an English phrase with the same meaning. But they're different words, so different tags. It's all completely rational and logical, and if you don't see the logic and/or reason, well: you're unworthy to write HTML. See Figure 1.