Re: Proposal: List attributes-- <UL>, <OL>, <LI> -Reply

Marcus E. Hennecke (marcush@crc.ricoh.com)
Fri, 17 May 1996 10:23:48 -0700


Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 10:23:48 -0700
From: marcush@crc.ricoh.com (Marcus E. Hennecke)
Message-Id: <199605171723.KAA00777@cougar.crc.ricoh.com>
To: www-html@w3.org, CTaylor@wposmtp.nps.navy.mil
Subject: Re: Proposal: List attributes-- <UL>, <OL>, <LI> -Reply

On Fri, 17 May 1996 10:15:00 -0800, Charles Peyton Taylor <CTaylor@wposmtp.nps.navy.mil> wrote:
> >>> Warren Steel <mudws@mail.olemiss.edu> 05/17/96 07:12am >>>
> >Charles Peyton Taylor wrote:
> >  Again, I'd give preference to enhancements that have been
> >successfully test and are in current use (in at least a small
> >minority of documents).     The most glaring omission is <UL
> >PLAIN>.  If not implemented, it's harmless; if implemented it
> 
> Actually, I forgot about PLAIN when I was writing that
> up yesterday.  It would be very useful, and I may 
> re-write what I wrote yesterday to include it.

Two things come to mind:

1. Wilbur does also have the MENU element, which was intended to
   display an unbulleted list. Of course, we all know that only
   few browsers get that right, but at least it's in there.
   (Actually, given that the most popular browsers, on which Wilbur
   supposedly is based, don't correctly render MENU and DIR, these
   two elements could probably be deprecated)
2. Since we already have TYPE, would <UL TYPE=EMPTY> be
   satisfactory? That way we wouldn't need a new attribute.

Marcus
--
Marcus E. Hennecke
marcush@crc.ricoh.com        http://www.crc.ricoh.com/~marcush/