- From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 23:44:13 -0400
- To: "Andrew Sidwell" <takkaria@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
On Mon, 02 Jul 2007 06:21:31 -0400, Andrew Sidwell <takkaria@gmail.com> wrote: > Charles McCathieNevile wrote: >> The suggestion made by someone that a singleton dt is "stupid" is >> incorrect. There are a number of cases where a term might be listed >> without a definition. > > AFAICS, no-one's actually given any use cases for having <dt> without > <dd> on this thread so far, and I can't think of any offhand. Care to > elaborate? Where you are developing a list of terms and haven't defined one. As someone pointed out, you *can* tell people they must have a di element even if it is empty. Which doesn't mean you should. Having a di element lets you decide this and use things like simple css or the selectors API (in development) to get what you want without having to do sibling counting and the like. On the other hand, it appears that there are difficulties dealing with DOM and styling for this. cheers Chaals -- Charles McCathieNevile, Opera Software: Standards Group hablo español - je parle français - jeg lærer norsk chaals@opera.com Catch up: Speed Dial http://opera.com
Received on Sunday, 8 July 2007 03:44:25 UTC