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

Re: html 5 and accessibility issue

From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 12:55:37 +0900
Message-Id: <B8140F0A-FE1E-42D2-94CC-A869EDF333DA@w3.org>
Cc: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, aurélien levy <aurelien.levy@free.fr>, public-html@w3.org
To: Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com>

Le 1 juil. 2007 à 01:28, Robert Burns a écrit :
> Just to clarify what Lachlan is saying, the HTML is valid. However,  
> it is non-conforming, if that's the meaning its supposed to convey.  
> A <dt> can have any number of associated <dd> element's after it.  
> However <dd>'s are always associated with the nearest preceding  
> sibling <dt>. The

In fact, HTML 4.01 is being very fuzzy on the definition for dl/dt/dd

     Definition lists vary only slightly from other types
     of lists in that list items consist of two parts: a
     term and a description. The term is given by the DT
     element and is restricted to inline content. The
     description is given with a DD element that contains
     block-level content.

but the HTML 4.01 example gives an argument for Aurélien. The example  
given by Aurélien is HTML 4.01 conformant. It doesn't mean it is wise  
or not misleading, but it is correct in HTML 4.01.

Here is an example with multiple terms and descriptions:

    <DD> A point equidistant from all points
               on the surface of a sphere.
    <DD> In some field sports, the player who
               holds the middle position on the field, court,
               or forward line.

Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager, QA Activity Lead
   QA Weblog - http://www.w3.org/QA/
      *** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Monday, 2 July 2007 03:55:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:23 UTC