W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > November 2009

RE: ISSUE-83 ACTION-152 Change Proposal for the use of dt/dd in figure and details

From: k. ilalan <kunter_ilalan@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 17:57:11 +0000
Message-ID: <COL103-W4038C6C25E2178E210077A84AA0@phx.gbl>
To: <public-html@w3.org>

> From: jackalmage@gmail.com
> Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 08:39:14 -0600
> To: shelley.just@gmail.com
> CC: public-html@w3.org
> Subject: Re: ISSUE-83 ACTION-152 Change Proposal for the use of dt/dd in  	figure and details
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:25 AM, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I'm also hoping that if members of the group have questions, as James
>> did, they also address them in an email to this group. Otherwise I, or
>> others, can't respond to their concerns or questions.
> I don't have any specific questions; the proposal seems clear.  I'll
> state on record, though, that I'm okay with the status quo.  (Second
> choice is minting a new element, but I don't see enough need to go
> there yet.)
> ~TJ

Hello - first mail to the list after loong time :)
(may it be the first of many)

I agree with the Shelley Powers' concerns that addresses being semantically meaningless of the definition lists, and certainly I would second the last proposal of hers; also I would agree what Tab Atkins said in here,  though, I will have specific questions bearing my own experience about <DL> usage:

I don't see how I shouldn't use a well-defined DEFINITION_LIST if it had existed, and not choose it over a generic UNORDERED_LIST with additional mark up (at random order - all for presentational concerns). Right now, my computer does not aware that I have actually defined a DEFINITION_TITLE that would bind inside several DEFINITION_LIST_ITEMS that are directly related to them, like those found in an encyclopedia.

Needless to say, at the moment it would be still OK if I simply ignored a <DT> declaration and list down <DD>s freely, or just leave a <DT> without introducing any sub-items for it.

If we can define a DEFINITION_LIST, such as we had similar hierarchical structure in <TABLE> ROWS and DATA declarations, this would lead to a great deal of redundancy by cutting off unnecessary NESTED_LIST usage..

In the end, our computers, not only the Google would understand there are things listed in an order and they have meanings. As how we have said at the beginning, we would have coded definition lists semantically, in the first place.

I would love to be more specific with examples, if requested.. 
wanna see the reaction, first.

best regards

Windows Live: Make it easier for your friends to see what you’re up to on Facebook.
Received on Wednesday, 11 November 2009 17:59:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:54 UTC