W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator-cvs@w3.org > August 2011

[Bug 11569] Directly nested <ul>/<ol> lists etc. should be valid or at least not turn red

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 20:48:22 +0000
To: www-validator-cvs@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1QvxtW-0002gl-UC@jessica.w3.org>

Etienne Miret <elimerl@gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
                 CC|                            |elimerl@gmail.com

--- Comment #1 from Etienne Miret <elimerl@gmail.com> 2011-08-23 20:48:21 UTC ---
The DTD definitely forbids lists (UL and OL) to contain anything else than LI.

The nested lists example listed in the norm is:
     <LI> ... Level one, number one...
        <LI> ... Level two, number one...
        <LI> ... Level two, number two...
        <OL start="10"> 
           <LI> ... Level three, number one...
        <LI> ... Level two, number three...
     <LI> ... Level one, number two...
This example is deprecated, but only because of the "start='10'".

Because of indentation, it seems that the two OLs are children of an UL or OL,
and thus are non DTD compliant. But in fact, LIs are implicitly closed only
when the next LI at the same level starts. Hence, the first OL is inside LI
level one number one, and the second OL is inside LI level two number one.
Which is perfectly DTD compliant.

Basically, we have a DTD that explicitly forbids directly nested lists and a
spec that is somewhat obscure. In such a case I recommend following the DTD
(which is normative).

Thus I vote for this bug to be marked invalid.

Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 23 August 2011 20:48:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:17:46 UTC