W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > October 2002

Re: OL needs the start attribute

From: Jonny Axelsson <jax@opera.no>
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 12:43:36 +0200
To: Joanne Hunter <jrhunter@menagerie.tf>, www-html@w3.org
Cc: w3c-html-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <IF43ONQOXVA9OJUPIVPXVZW05DA3186.3dabf158@defnit>

15.10.02 04:52:47, Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu> wrote:
>On 10/14/02 4:56 PM, "Joanne Hunter" <jrhunter@menagerie.tf> wrote:
>> "Jelks Cabaniss" <jelks@jelks.nu>:

>>> The 'start' attribute on 'ol' needs to be reinstated for XHTML 2.

>> Another point: CSS numbering has been taken out of CSS 2.1, so this is
>> probably even more important.

>Actually, due to feedback (and the fact that it looks like we have two
>interoperable implementations of counters), numbering will be in the next
>draft of CSS 2.1.

>I also think the 'start' attribute on 'ol' should be reinstated.

So does, to my knowledge, the unanimous HTML Working Group. The only minor 
issue of contention would be whether or not the 'start' attribute on 'ol' 
should be reinstated.

To clarify that statement, the 'value' attribute on 'li' should be 
reinstated. This makes 'start' strictly speaking redundant (you can set the 
same 'value' value on the first 'li' as you would put in 'start' on an 
'ol'). But 'start' has existed before, it may be more natural, and you can 
say a little redundancy has never killed anyone.

I tend toward 'value' only (no 'start') as it seems to me that list number 
is really a property of the list item, and not the 'ol' list collection as a 
whole. Can't say I feel strongly on the subject, so I can easily be 
persuaded otherwise. CSS (extended to access the attribute values) can 
easily cover both alternatives.


Jonny Axelsson,
Documentation,
Opera Software 
Received on Tuesday, 15 October 2002 06:51:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:53 GMT