# Can "bolding" text use the Strong tag?

**URL:** <https://forum.pinegrow.com/t/can-bolding-text-use-the-strong-tag/8368>\
**Category:** Feature Request\
**Created:** [September 18, 2023, 1:23pm UTC](https://forum.pinegrow.com/t/can-bolding-text-use-the-strong-tag/8368 "2023-09-18T13:23:51Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 5\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![fakesamgregory](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex036/user_avatar/forum.pinegrow.com/fakesamgregory/32/3903_2.png) [@fakesamgregory](https://forum.pinegrow.com/u/fakesamgregory)\
**Post date:** [September 18, 2023, 1:23pm UTC](https://forum.pinegrow.com/t/can-bolding-text-use-the-strong-tag/8368/1 "2023-09-18T13:23:51Z")

</div>

I wonder if this is a poll-type solution but when making text bold currently Pinegrow wraps it in a `<b>` tag which is [semantically meaningless](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/b). I thought it was deprecated due to it being a tag associated with style and not semantics but seemingly not.

I’d love it if it used the `<strong>` tag.

And similarly if italicising text used `<em>`.

I get that this is petty but I thought I’d raise it in case this was a relic feature and maybe if the majority preferred it to be an action that creates semantic code and browsers ubiquitously bold strong tags and italicise em tags, it would make sense.

Just a thought!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![mxs](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex036/user_avatar/forum.pinegrow.com/mxs/32/2943_2.png) [@mxs](https://forum.pinegrow.com/u/mxs)\
**Post date:** [September 25, 2023, 1:50pm UTC](https://forum.pinegrow.com/t/can-bolding-text-use-the-strong-tag/8368/2 "2023-09-25T13:50:36Z")

</div>

Both **& will give identical results.  
However, is meant to give more significance,  
Personally, I use both but add some colour to strong in the CSS file.  
ie.  
b{  
font-weight: bolder;  
}  
strong {  
font-weight: bolder;  
color:#55789f;  
}**

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![madjedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/cc9497/32.png) [@madjedo](https://forum.pinegrow.com/u/madjedo)\
**Post date:** [September 25, 2023, 6:07pm UTC](https://forum.pinegrow.com/t/can-bolding-text-use-the-strong-tag/8368/3 "2023-09-25T18:07:20Z")

</div>

Are you curious about this for SEO-purposes?

This guy had a good remark regarding this: [seo - Does bold text really improve your search engine rankings? - Webmasters Stack Exchange](https://webmasters.stackexchange.com/questions/76606/does-bold-text-really-improve-your-search-engine-rankings)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![fakesamgregory](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex036/user_avatar/forum.pinegrow.com/fakesamgregory/32/3903_2.png) [@fakesamgregory](https://forum.pinegrow.com/u/fakesamgregory)\
**Post date:** [September 26, 2023, 7:46am UTC](https://forum.pinegrow.com/t/can-bolding-text-use-the-strong-tag/8368/4 "2023-09-26T07:46:31Z")

</div>

I’m not quite sure what you’re referring to here. Maybe my explanation wasn’t clear enough.

`<b>` is semantically meaniningless  
`<strong>` gives emphasis to words/phrases.

Just makes sense to use strong instead of b when bolding.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![fakesamgregory](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex036/user_avatar/forum.pinegrow.com/fakesamgregory/32/3903_2.png) [@fakesamgregory](https://forum.pinegrow.com/u/fakesamgregory)\
**Post date:** [September 26, 2023, 7:49am UTC](https://forum.pinegrow.com/t/can-bolding-text-use-the-strong-tag/8368/5 "2023-09-26T07:49:01Z")

</div>

SEO as a byproduct of writing semantic code. I wouldn’t say a `strong` tag would make any tangible difference to SEO specifically.

`b` is semantically meaningless and is a legacy piece of HTML when we were styling elements with HTML. Since CSS/HTML 5 HTML should be responsible for meaning only and CSS for style.