<UL> cited as <OL> (was : [css3-webfonts] Downloaded fonts should not...)

Apropos of an earlier discussion, here is an
interesting (and perhaps classic) example of
an unordered list (as perceived by its author)
being cited as an ordered list by a commentator :

Ambrose Li wrote:

> On 10/04/2008, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:

>>  L. David Baron wrote:

>>> I'm not quite sure what you mean by "in a technical way".  But I can
>>> . . .
>>>  * the font might be in a highly unusual style that you wouldn't
>>> . . .
>>>  * the font might use an encoding hack where it encodes glyphs that
>>> . . .
>>>  * the font might be a malicious font designed to make the text in
>>> . . .

>>  Add to that
>>
>>   * the font might be subsetted for that particular page/website, leaving
>>   . . .

> I think points 1 and 4 are valid uses.
> 
> But I think points 2 and 3 are abuses . . .