Daniel Hiester, at 22:19 on Thu, 19 Jul 2001, wrote: > Why is it that we don't simply have an element that means 'list.' > Why was it so important to have the markup parser distinguish the > difference between an ordered and unordered list? Semantically they are different as others have pointed out, but I wonder, instead of <ol>, <ul>, <dl> tags, why wasn't there simply one <list> tag with a type attribute, e.g. <ol> = <list type='ordered'> <ul> = <list type='unordered'> <dl> = <list type='definition'> <dir> = <list type='directory'> <menu> = <list type='menu'> This would make it easier to add new list types, and even permit combining them in ways that you currently can't to capture more semantics, e.g. <list type='ordered definition'> Perhaps <ol>, <ul>, <dl> were preferred due to brevity? ("unix shell command" philosophy? but then <blockquote> could have been <bq> etc.) Maybe someone with more "history" could refer us to the relevant archived discussion. TantekReceived on Friday, 20 July 2001 13:40:17 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:49 GMT