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

RE: dl, dd, dt in XHTML 2.0

From: Marcos Caceres <marcos@datadriven.com.au>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 18:48:57 +1000
To: "'Jens Meiert'" <jens.meiert@erde3.com>, <www-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <007b01c31eac$a7feaec0$277fb583@cifkgdutytut2>

Hey Jens,
I agree that domain specific semantics for a term might call for only
one definition (as is the case with an ontology like Dublin Core Terms
or a in a General Definition part of a W3C spec doc). However, any
dictionary that I've ever looked at always contains one or more
definitions for a term. I don't see any reason why you wouldn't have
multiple definitions for a term. For instance, the word 'Cat' can be a
furry four legged creature, or an abbreviation for the type of boat
'catamaran'.

In XHTML 2.0, how I structure my terms and definitions is *open* (or
ambiguous) in the RelaxNG implementation:

  <define name="dl">
      <element name="dl">
        <ref name="dl.attlist"/>
        <oneOrMore>
          <choice>
        <ref name="dt"/>
        <ref name="dd"/>
          </choice>
        </oneOrMore>
      </element>
    </define>

Correct me if I'm wrong, but according to the above definition, I can
have one or more dt or dl in any order and it should still be valid. I
would be nice to hear why you don't agree with my suggestion of
structuring terms and definitions through encapsulation. 

Thanks again for the feedback, 
Marcos 
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Jens Meiert [mailto:jens.meiert@erde3.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, 20 May 2003 5:46 PM
To: Marcos Caceres; www-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: dl, dd, dt in XHTML 2.0

Is there any object out there having more than o n e definition? Thought
a
definition implies only one exact and precise annotation.


 Jens Meiert.


PS.
I know what you mean, Marcos, but I do not agree to your suggestion.



> Dear all, 
> 
> This has probably already been proposed a number of times, but I'm
just
> wondering if it wouldn't make more 'semantic' sense to encapsulate dd
> elements inside the dt element in xhtml 2.0. 
> 
> For instance, 
> 
>  
> 
> <dl>
> 
>   <dt>My term
> 
>             <dd>This is the first definition</dd>
> 
> <dd>This is the second definition</dd>
> 
>  </dt>
> 
> </dl>
> 
>  
> 
> At the moment, it would seem that the semantic relationship between
the 
> dt
> and the dd(s) elements is only implicit as it is positional (and only
> perhaps visually semantic when rendered), rather than explicit through
> encapsulation. Less importantly, encapsulation dd inside dt would also
> follows the structure for coding every other type of the list module
in
> xhtml 2.0.. aside from nesting of list terms and definition elements. 
> which
> might be something else to consider all together for definition lists.
> 
>  
> 
> When I think about it some more, doing this kind of nesting may also 
> require
> the renaming of the dl, dd, dt, or even adding some sort of container 
> that
> wraps around a definition.. Something different like this:
> 
>  
> 
> <dl>
> 
>     <definition>
> 
> <dt>My term</dt>
> 
>             <dd>This is the a definition</dd>
> 
> <dd>This is the another definition</dd>
> 
>       </definition>
> 
> </dl>
> 
>  
> 
> Just a thought. Let me know what you think, 
> 
> Marcos
> 
> 


-- 
Jens Meiert

Steubenstr. 28
D-26123 Oldenburg

Telefon +49 (0)441 99 86 147
Telefax +49 (0)89 1488 2325 91
Mobil +49 (0)175 78 4146 5

eMail <jens@meiert.com>
Internet <http://meiert.com>
Received on Tuesday, 20 May 2003 04:49:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:55 GMT