- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:00:47 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10748
Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |WONTFIX
--- Comment #4 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> 2010-10-12 10:00:46 UTC ---
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are
satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If
you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please
reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML
Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest
title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue
yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document:
http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html
Status: Rejected
Change Description: no spec change
Rationale: The example is actually entirely as intended currently.
There are three examples with the same list. One in the <ol> section, where the
order _does_ matter, because the order is the order in which I lived in those
countries. Then there are two examples in the <ul> section, where the order is
incidental, but showing that the lists are still ordered — the first example is
alphabetical, and the second example has the countries listed by their net
worth in 2007 (their "account balance"). In the two <ul> cases, the order
doesn't really matter, but they are still ordered. That is the point that this
example is trying to make.
Does that make more sense? I don't really know how to make it clearer in the
spec.
--
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, 12 October 2010 10:00:48 UTC