W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > March 2003

Re: [XHTML2] di element?

From: Etan Wexler <ewexler@stickdog.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 02:36:13 -0800
To: www-html@w3.org
Cc: Ernest Cline <ernestcline@mindspring.com>
Message-id: <BAA2CA97.734%ewexler@stickdog.com>

Ernest Cline wrote to <mailto:www-style@w3.org> on 1 March 2003 in "[XHTML2]
di element?" (<mid:3E60A05C.19381.AFF55DC@localhost>):

> Might it be thought worthwhile to add a <di> element to the List
> module?

It would absolutely be worthwhile.

> This would give a way to
> structuraly group items without having to use the class attribute.

Your point is understood, but I must note that the 'class' attribute cannot
structurally group elements. The 'class' attribute groups elements logically
only. The need for a 'di' element type is thus increased, if anything.

> Currently, grouping must be inferred from the convention that
> (dt+,dd+) is one definition list item. Back when these elements didn't
> have any attributes this wasn't really a problem

This was always a problem in that a definition list item, having no element
of its own, could not posess an ID. For me and for some others, the ability
to assign an ID and to refer to it is the main benefit of the new element
type. Consider the following document fragments.

<a href="#term-XHTML">XHTML definition</a>
 <dt id="term-XHTML">XHTML</dt>
 <dd>Extensible Hypertext Markup Language</dd>

<a href="#def-XHTML">XHTML definition</a>
 <di id="def-XHTML">
  <dd>Extensible Hypertext Markup Language</dd>

In typical Web browsers, the apparent difference between the two is slight.
Regardless, the semantic difference is significant. The effects are felt
anywhere that addressing elements is important: style sheets, metadata, and
so on.

Etan Wexler, son of son of scion of scion.
Received on Sunday, 23 March 2003 05:36:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:06:03 UTC