W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > April 2008

Re: proposed li:marker pseudo-class

From: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2008 11:59:02 +0100
Message-ID: <47F366F6.4040901@david-woolley.me.uk>
To: www-html@w3.org

Tina Holmboe wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 11:14:24AM +0100, David Woolley wrote:

> 
>   Um. And www-svg for CSS feature requests? www-style, perhaps?

Oops.  Yes I did mean www-style@w3.org!

>   Perhaps I am confused, but I certainly can see no difficulty in
>   claiming that "this is a list of items, each of which has a heading"
>   and label it a perfectly valid use-case?

Because it is not a numbered list.

If you take the position that this is a numbered list, then simple 
documents, that would normally be done with Hn and P are really 
unnumbered lists and should be done with UL and LI, with the marker 
styled out of the LIs.

Furthermore, to a large extent, whether or not the headings are numbered 
  is a styling issue, and would be specified in a narrative style sheet 
for someone manually doing the layout, so it is wrong that the HTML 
should differ from that for a document without section numbers or with 
the section numbers included in the Hn elements.

(One common reason for wanting to force numbered headings in [X]HTML 
documents is because one is trying to reproduced legal documents, 
particarly statutes, accurately, but in that case it is probably 
dangerous to allow automatic numbering.)

(In at least one version of XHTML2 this would be done with section and h 
elements, and the h elements styled to include the numbers.)


> 


-- 
David Woolley
Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want.
RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam,
that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work.
Received on Wednesday, 2 April 2008 10:59:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:16:13 GMT