Conformance of DL Groups Missing DT or DD

Hi,
   The spec isn't entirely clear about the conformance of description 
lists that omit either the dt or dd of a group.

The spec states:

> If a dl element contains only dt elements, then it consists of one group 
> with names but no values, and the document is non-conforming.
> 
> If a dl element contains only dd elements, then it consists of one group 
> with values but no names, and the document is non-conforming.

That makes the following non-conforming:

<dl>
   <dd>A description without a term
</dl>

<dl>
   <dt>A term without a description
</dl>

> If a dl element starts with one or more dd elements, then the first 
> group has no associated name.
> 
> If a dl element ends with one or more dt elements, then the last group 
> has no associated value.

It is not clear whether the following lists are conforming or not. e.g.

<dl>
   <dd>A description without a term

   <dt>Term
   <dd>Term description.
</dl>

(And similarly for lists ending with <dt>)

Since the list does contain both dt and dd, and contains more than one 
group, it doesn't match either of the first 2 conditions.  Given that 
it's non-conforming for a list to contain only a single group without 
either dt or dd, it would seem logical for any group missing either 
terms or descriptions to be non-conforming as well.  Please make this 
clearer in the spec.

-- 
Lachlan Hunt - Opera Software
http://lachy.id.au/
http://www.opera.com/

Received on Tuesday, 26 February 2008 10:50:17 UTC