Forum:Obsolete and deprecated HTML4 elements

So I was reading the blog post and associated link and just wanted to check that I understood correctly what I was reading, and then ask what to do instead.

So am I right in thinking that, with HTML5, the following codes will not work:

If so, what are the best alternatives?

Thanks, Enodoc (Talk ) (Eno@Fable) 18:38, July 5, 2012 (UTC)


 * Everything above excluding  will not work after the upgrade to HTML5. This table provides the best alternatives for each.



Note that the above declarations can all be fitted into a style attribute on any element or into MediaWiki CSS files. This is perfectly valid:  Hello World! For further CSS references, see w3schools. 18:56, July 5, 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks guys, I thought they'd probably be covered by  I just wasn't sure of the exact codes. -- Enodoc (Talk ) 19:31, July 5, 2012 (UTC)


 * Just an FYI, is also equivalent to 120% font-size (which is shorter than 'larger'). Rappy 21:56, July 5, 2012 (UTC)

So will no longer work? -- 70.49.127.65 07:00, July 6, 2012 (UTC)
 * I added the replacement for that to the table.
 * Let me just note that  is incorrect HTML5. It needs to be , without the semicolumn.  19:35, July 6, 2012 (UTC)
 * Let me just note that  is incorrect HTML5. It needs to be , without the semicolumn.  19:35, July 6, 2012 (UTC)


 * Also, do not add a semi-column if only one property is added in quotations, as that is incorrect HTML5. On top of that, you can also use  tags for strike-through.  19:55, July 6, 2012 (UTC)


 * Wow is that true? Where is written that? I usually tend to add the semicolon even if there is one propriety or it's the last one...

"End all CSS declarations with a semicolon - ;"

That is what the W3C recommends.

Google recommends it too btw.


 * First of all, that is CSS. CSS is not HTML. Also, try to add a code that matches HTML5 standards with  or another use of style in an HTML tag and see if it validates. I've tried it and it didn't.
 * Whatever is in a style attribute is CSS. I just checked it and the HTML validated. 20:26, July 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I missed this from the previous comment: here's the relevant W3C document. Apologies for the confusion. 20:30, July 8, 2012 (UTC)


 * @TK-999: Wow! You're actually somebody who reads specs, aren't you? :)
 * EDIT: @MateyY: Please take another look at the pages I linked to above. I assure you they do concern CSS.

Seem strange that  is still supported, but not. -- Fandyllic (talk &middot; contr) 12 Jul 2012 10:37 AM Pacific
 * I think it's for pragmatic reasons. Whatever it's caused by, in HTML 5, it defines side comments, so it has a semantic value. See the relevant specs for details and when not to use. 18:42, July 12, 2012 (UTC)