- From: Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com>
- Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 11:28:37 -0500
- To: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- Cc: Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, aurélien levy <aurelien.levy@free.fr>, public-html@w3.org
On Jun 30, 2007, at 11:07 AM, Lachlan Hunt wrote: > > Steven Faulkner wrote: >>>> <dl> >>>> <dt> 1st terme </dt> >>>> <dd> 1st terme description </dd> >>>> <dd> 2nd terme description </dd> >>>> <dt> 2nd terme </dt> >>>> <dt> 3rd terme</dt> >>>> <dd> 3rd terme description</dd> >>>> </dl> >>>> >>>> with no way for AT to know that 2nd terme description is >>>> actually the >>>> 2nd terme description and not the second description of the >>>> first terme >>> Actually, no, you can't. What you're doing is not conforming to >>> either >>> HTML 4 or HTML 5. >> How is the code of aurelien's example definition list not conforming >> to html 4.01? > > It is technically conforming, but the example is trying to > associate a <dd> with a subsequent <dt>, which has never been > possible. It's also not clear what the use case for doing so is. > Just swap the <dt> and <dd> for the 2nd term and description, and > it gives the intended meaning. Just to clarify what Lachlan is saying, the HTML is valid. However, it is non-conforming, if that's the meaning its supposed to convey. A <dt> can have any number of associated <dd> element's after it. However <dd>'s are always associated with the nearest preceding sibling <dt>. The It would have to mean: <dl> <dt> 1st terme </dt> <dd> 1st terme description </dd> <dd> 1st terme 2nd description </dd> <dt> 2nd terme </dt> <dt> 3rd terme</dt> <dd> 3rd terme description</dd> </dl> according to the spec (where the is no description associated with the second term and 2 descriptions associated with the first term). I'm not sure if that's clearly and explicitly conveyed in the existing HTML5 draft, but that is the case with HTML4.01. I don't imagine the draft means to change that from HTML 4.01. Its possible we could add more structure to a definition list like XHTML2 did with: <dl> <li> <dt></dt> <dd></dd> </li> </dl> This might help make a stronger association and even allow reversing the normal HTML 4.01 order for these elements. If there's a use case for such more complicated definition lists we would need to come up with though (if necessary). Take care, Rob
Received on Saturday, 30 June 2007 16:28:44 UTC