W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > June 2005

Re: ol, ul, nl, dl, oh my! (was Re: [XHTML 2] removal of navigation list element)

From: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2005 18:32:47 +0200
Message-ID: <429DE32F.8060606@disruptive-innovations.com>
To: www-html@w3.org

Edward Lass wrote:

> The 2.0 WD says, "Both types of lists [ol and ul] are made up of
> sequences of list items defined by the li element."  This is true in
> HTML 4.01 too: "Both types of lists are made up of sequences of list
> items defined by the LI element (whose end tag may be omitted)."

A basic problem is that "both lists" seen above. Why do we still have ol AND ul
in XHTML?

(a) the names are incorrectly chosen. ul is really not unordered, it is
     un-numbered. ol is not more ordered than ul, it's just numbered.
(b) the styles can be controlled by CSS anyway

</Daniel>
Received on Wednesday, 1 June 2005 16:32:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:19:03 UTC