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: Mikko Rantalainen <mikko.rantalainen@peda.net>
Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2005 12:03:03 +0300
Message-ID: <429ECB47.5050904@peda.net>
CC: www-html@w3.org

Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Jun 2005, Shane McCarron wrote:
>>Also, this is really about the semantics, not the presentation.  If you
>>put stuff in an "ol" list you are saying "the order of these items is
>>important, and likely critical to understanding the information".
> No, I'm not. It's just explicit numbering. I want to make some points, and
> I number them, for example in order to refer them elsewhere in the
> document, or outside it.

And you cannot even refer to those numbers because there's 
(currently) no way to refer to automatilly generated marker text 
containing the number. The original reason, IMO, to use <ol> was to 
get automatic numbering so that you don't need to modify (n-k) items 
in case you want to insert a new element in position k in a list 
with n items.

How about using a <list> and <li> (list item) which could contain 
optional <lm> (list marker) which would be an explicit marker for 
this list item. This would allow the author to refer to specific 
list item outside the list. The marker is definately part of the 
content and not part of the style (think legal text with stuff like 

Received on Thursday, 2 June 2005 09:03:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:06:10 UTC