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

FW: OL needs the start attribute

From: Peter Foti (PeterF) <PeterF@SystolicNetworks.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 11:20:17 -0400
Message-ID: <A10A983C9DFBD4119F0300104B2EA6B725FD3E@ZIPPY>
To: "'www-html@w3.org'" <www-html@w3.org>


> there is no implication of ascent or descent, just order 
> which cannot be
> changed.

Says who?  The spec/recommendation certainly doesn't imply such 
a limitation.  An ordered list is a series of items in a 
sequence, a recurrent pattern.  There is no requirement that 
this pattern be ascending and incremented by 1.  


> The convention of showing an ordered list with 
> ascending numbers
> is just one convention

That's exactly my point.  This is probably the most common 
convention, but the specs don't limit us to this convention.


> there is no essential reason why 
> an ordered
> list should be labelled with a sequence of markings 
> possessing an implicit
> linear order, like the normal ways of marking an ordered list 
> do.

The fact that it is ordered would indicate that there is some 
numeric interval associated with the list.  How that interval 
number is displayed is indeed a presentational aspect, and 
should be handled by CSS.  But nonetheless, the interval still 
exists, regardless of whether it is displayed or not, and I 
should be able to determine what that interval is, and where it 
begins.  I agree with you that the rendering of the list should 
be handled by CSS, but I should be able to define where it 
starts and what linear pattern it should obey.  

Regards,
Peter
  


> -----Original Message-----
> From: ssyreeni@cc.helsinki.fi 
> [mailto:ssyreeni@cc.helsinki.fi]On Behalf
> Of Sampo Syreeni
> Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2002 4:28 PM
> To: Peter Foti (PeterF)
> Cc: 'www-html@w3.org'
> Subject: RE: OL needs the start attribute
> 
> 
> On 2002-10-16, Peter Foti (PeterF) uttered to 'www-html@w3.org':
> 
> >Another example could be the descending list (as was already 
> mentioned)
> >using a step attribute.
> 
> I the example isn't relevant in the least. On unordered list 
> is just that,
> a list where the items can be arbitrarily reordered without 
> changing the
> semantics. In essence, it is a bag of items. The ordered list is the
> opposite, a list which cannot be reordered. I.e. a list. In 
> the latter,
> there is no implication of ascent or descent, just order 
> which cannot be
> changed. The convention of showing an ordered list with 
> ascending numbers
> is just one convention, and there is no essential reason why 
> an ordered
> list should be labelled with a sequence of markings 
> possessing an implicit
> linear order, like the normal ways of marking an ordered list 
> do. Hence,
> no start attribute, no increments, but multiple CSS styles 
> which control
> the precise rendering of the list.
> -- 
> Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy - mailto:decoy@iki.fi, tel:+358-50-5756111
> student/math+cs/helsinki university, http://www.iki.fi/~decoy/front
> openpgp: 050985C2/025E D175 ABE5 027C 9494 EEB0 E090 8BA9 0509 85C2
> 
Received on Thursday, 17 October 2002 11:13:43 GMT

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