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 18:24:06 +0100
Message-ID: <46CB1FB6.5070205@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
To: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
CC: Geoffrey Sneddon <foolistbar@googlemail.com>, public-html@w3.org



Simon Pieters wrote:

> The distinction is that <ol> isn't necessarily appropriate just because 
> the items come in a particular order. They may for instance be sorted 
> alphabetically but the order doesn't actually matter. I think the spec 
> needs to be clearer on this point.
> 
> http://www.autisticcuckoo.net/archive.php?id=2007/08/07/lists discusses 
> this issue.

I would be very happy for Autistic Cuckoo's clarification to
appear as a gloss : "A list is an ordered list if changing the
order of the list items change[s] the meaning of the list as a whole."

Philip TAYLOR
Received on Tuesday, 21 August 2007 17:24:32 UTC

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