I'd expect 1 name (and not my own) to "stand out from the crowd", here
Ok i see the nature of the problem -- in the current css stylesheet we are using on DC, all hyperlinks are bolded automatically, to help distinguish them. That makes the use of an <em> or <strong> impossible (or near impossible) to see.
There are actually a few places where em (or strong) is used on links, like in emphasizing buddies on member list (or it turns out on sticky topics) -- but most of the time it's sort of redundant. The buddies on member list is an exception.
I have two choices for how to fix:
- First, I can stick with our style of always bolding hyperlinks, and differentiate memberlist buddies (and indeed, if we like, all strong hyperlinks) with different css (making font larger, italic, dif color).
- Second, we can reconsider whether its wise to bold all hyperlinks.
Both fixes are easy -- the real question this raises is whether we should be bolding all hyperlinks -- and i need some opinions on this.
So let's set aside the issue of highlighting buddies in member list -- i'll solve that once we answer the question of whether all hyperlinks should be bolded.
I do find it makes it easier to identify hyperlinks when they are bolded. I have experimented with unbolding hyperlinks locally and one problem I have is that it becomes then very hard to distinguish visited hyperlinks from normal text (or alternatively from non-visited links).
Help me decide, here are some screenshots to compare:
Bold hyperlinks:Forum Upgraded August 30, 2015 - Report issues here Forum Upgraded August 30, 2015 - Report issues here
Non-bold hyperlinks:Forum Upgraded August 30, 2015 - Report issues here Forum Upgraded August 30, 2015 - Report issues here
Opinions? Which do you prefer?