Anyone not really like the W3C's 'Semantics' in HTML?

Because I know that this is a weird complaint, but I just find half their 'recommended' uses for HTML tags and arguments about 'semantics' completely illogical.

Like the whole meaning of the <b>, <i>, <strong> and <em> tags. Who the hell calls text 'strong'? Emphasised I can sort of get, but 'strong'? And on a purely dictionary sense of the term, aren't the words 'strong' and 'emphasised' actually less meaningful than their older alternatives?

Or the whole <object> tag malarky. Why the hell does this thing even exist when practically speaking, the older embed and the newer audio and video elements do very much similar things but actually make more sense semantics wise? If you want your code to be readable and make sense in terms of semantics, why the hell would you add an element whose name means any old random thing and whose purpose is literally the same as at least three other elements (including the image and iframe one)?

And then we get HTML 5's new stuff. Like the section tag, which is supposedly meant for 'meaningful' bits of content. Yes, because a section in real life just has to have something meaningful in it, right?

Or the article element, which refers to a section of content that forms an independent part of a document or site; for example, a magazine or newspaper article, or a blog entry.

That's not vague in the slightest, is it? What about cases where a single article is on two pages, like Cracked? Neither page is an independent part of a document, so shouldn't we be able to have the article tag start on page 1 and end on page 2? Or how about serials/story chapters? They don't make sense on their own, but practically speaking, most would consider them at least article style content HTML/website wise.

There's also the address element, which supposedly represents contact information, but apparently shouldn't be used for actual addresses. What kind of twit thought that up? And aren't addresses kind of contact information by default? What, is sending a letter not considering contacting someone any more?

Does anyone else think this stuff is just ridiculously confusing and stupid in general? Because to be honest, I've basically just decided that 'screw it, I'll use stuff depending on whether I think it makes sense, not whether some stuck up academic with idiotic views and no backing in English does'.

And that's not even getting into the whole box model debacle (the border-box one makes more sense than the default).

 

One of the problems with semantic elements is they are not recognised by older browsers. Everything needs to evolve but trying to make your sites present a uniform browsing experience across all platforms seems to get harder all the time.

 

Meh...half the time I still use the older codes, does that make me a dinosaur and bad coder