Talk:Strikethrough

Distinction between style and semantics
In the context of HTML and CSS, does the article need to point out the distinction between strikethrough as a means of styling text, and strikethrough as a representation of semantics? e.g. if I use, then that says nothing about the meaning of the strikethrough. If, on the other hand, I use  tags, whether or not I also style them with , then I'm saying that the text should be represented in a manner that suggests it has been written but then subsequently deleted, but deleted in a manner that still indicates its previous existence. tags could potentially be represented in other, non-visual manners. (e.g. by following the struck-through text with the phrase "No, scratch that!" when reading it using text-to-speech software). The same cannot be said of the  styling, which does not imply that the text should be interpreted as having been deleted. -- 141.163.6.144 (talk) 10:52, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

'cross out' redirects here
which I think of as a handwritten literate language mannerism (or illiterate, as in replacements for signatures) but the article focuses on the typographic angle. Is there a more appropriate redirect candidate? Arlo James Barnes 23:56, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Any way to use [alt](number) to present strikethrough?
Any way to highlight a section of text and then use some alt-(number) combination to show a strikethrough of the highlighted text? UnderEducatedGeezer (talk) 03:55, 13 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Not that I am aware of. If anyone knows, please let us know. Mseingth2133444  ( talk / contribs ) 17:20, 13 March 2024 (UTC)