W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2007

Re: (Un)Ordered lists

From: Philip Taylor (Webmaster) <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 17:51:20 +0100
Message-ID: <46CB1808.1010701@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
To: Geoffrey Sneddon <foolistbar@googlemail.com>
CC: public-html@w3.org



Geoffrey Sneddon wrote:
> 
> The definition for |ol| and |ul| says that they represent an "ordered 
> list of items" and an "unordered list of items". It doesn't say in what 
> way they are ordered. Should the definition be refined to something like 
> "A list where the order of the items has meaning."?

How is that better than "an ordered list" ?  The latter is idiomatic,
widely used and widely understood; your re-casting may be preferable
in terms of Basic English, but I am not convinced that technical
specifications can or should be expressed in B.E.

Philip TAYLOR
Received on Tuesday, 21 August 2007 16:51:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:48 UTC