Re: Question on DFN

David Perrell (davidp@earthlink.net)
Wed, 8 Oct 1997 12:11:50 -0700


From: "David Perrell" <davidp@earthlink.net>
To: <www-html@w3.org>, "Rob" <wlkngowl@unix.asb.com>
Cc: "Peter Flynn" <pflynn@imbolc.ucc.ie>
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 12:11:50 -0700
Message-ID: <01bcd41e$079bf520$981cd9cf@davidp>
Subject: Re: Question on DFN

Rob wrote:
---
Not necessary: (1) This sort of list (2) where items are rendered as a
continuous paragraph (3) rather than as lines (4) is useful
---
and Peter Flynn wrote:
---
Bullets certainly have no meaning, but numbering does, (a) because you
can have inline numbered lists, and (b) because they don't have to be
numbers, they can be letters.
---

I wasn't arguing against inline lists. I wholeheartedly agree that inline
lists are a good thing. I even think there is a use for inline unordered
lists. But CSS1 doesn't provide a way to do them.

The problem is that the properties that define how a list is displayed --
list-style-type/image/position -- apply only to the list-item display type.
So when you change the display type of OL/UL and LI to inline, those
properties cease to apply and list markers will not display.

If the CSS1 list-style-type and list-style-image properties applied to all
display types, then inline lists would be declarable. But that would require
a caveat on the initial value for list-style-type: "disk for elements of
display type list-item, none for all other display types."

There's been discussion on this list of content generation and counters in
CSS. So at some point you might be able to declare something like:

  OL.inline {
        display: inline;
        counter-type: lower-alpha;
        counter-start: "a" }
  OL.inline LI {
        display: inline;
        before: "(" OL.inline$counter ") " }

David Perrell

P.S.:  If this message looks weird, please excuse. MS Outlook Express is NOT
working for me.