W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > February 2007

[whatwg] Heading, binding, LH (was:XSLT: HTML 5 --> HTML)

From: David Latapie <david@empyree.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 14:07:39 +0100
Message-ID: <20070213140739095703.22ade1a0@empyree.org>
On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 17:18:59 +0900, Karl Dubost wrote:
> David,
> 
> Le 9 f?vr. 2007 ? 23:30, David Latapie a ?crit :
>> dl
>>   dd (image)
>>   dt (description)
>> /dl
> 
> this is the opposite you should do.
> 
> Let's say that you have an image which is *really* part of a 
> definition list then
> 
> dl
>   dt (image)        <- dt = Definition term        as in the term to 
> be defined.
>   dd (description)  <- dd = Definition description as in the 
> explanation of the term.
> /dl
> 
> For example, in a school a list of animal images with their definitions
> 	image of a fox with the appropriate alt
> 	and then the fox description.

Right. I'll try to find an easy way to transform my SQL dump -- ouch.

>> Exception is when I have several picture of the same thing
>> 
>> dl
>>   dd (image 1)
>>   dd (image 2)
>>   dd (image 3)
>>   dt Various steps in the making of coffee
>> /dl
> 
> 
> This doesn't exist. dt must be always before dd. You can't do that. A 
> parser would not be able to  associate the three dd to the dt. Plus 
> the fact that it is an abuse of dl/dt/dd.

This is my belief there is a need for properly ?binding? (is that the 
right term) a picture and description. I'd go further by saying we need 
the rethink the ?master-slave?/?content-description? relationship in 
X/HTML

table+caption
image+description (not speaking of "alt" here)
dt+dd
list+introduction to the list (LH)
...

> Last but not least
>> (by the way, here, an ordering would be great, but only ol may have
>> semantic order - except if one consider that hN are semantically order
>> and using CSS counter make them visually ordered too)
> 
> It /is/ ordered. Elements of an (XML) tree are ordered (it is one of 
> the differences with graphs.)

I think I understand what you mean. So, what is the point of <ol> with 
respect to <ul>, then? Just presentational numbering? SGML legacy? Is 
<ul> ordered -- thzt would be paradoxal)?
-- 
</david_latapie>             U+0F00
http://blog.empyree.org/en (English)
http://blog.empyree.org/fr (Fran?ais)
http://blog.empyree.org/sl (Slovensko)
Received on Tuesday, 13 February 2007 05:07:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:32 UTC