W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > October 2005

[whatwg] [WA1] <ol type=a> is semantic

From: dolphinling <dolphinling@myrealbox.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 10:54:59 -0400
Message-ID: <434D23C3.9060103@myrealbox.com>
Simon Pieters wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I think that <ol> should allow a type attribute as in HTML4[1].
> 
> An 1,2,3 list is different from an a,b,c list. If you want to discuss a 
> particular list item in the text then it doesn't make sense to say "f" 
> when the list says "6", for instance. Consider the following real world 
> example[2]:
> 
> | Quiz: Complete the sentence,"OpenDocument is ..."
> |
> | (a) An open, XML-based file format.
> | (b) An open standard, supported by the OASIS and ISO standards groups.
> | (c)The default file format for the upcoming OpenOffice.org 2.0 and 
> KOffice 1.4.
> | (d) A top prospect for an official format for the European Commission.
> | (e) Our best chance to fight vendor lock-in associated with 
> proprietary formats.
> | (f) All of the above.
> |
> | The correct answer is (f) All of the above.
> 
> I think the markup for the above should be something along the lines:
> 
> # <p>Quiz: Complete the sentence,"OpenDocument is ..."
> # <ol type=a>
> #  <li>An open, XML-based file format.
> #  <li>An open standard, supported by the OASIS and ISO standards groups.
> #  <li>The default file format for the upcoming OpenOffice.org 2.0 and 
> KOffice 1.4.
> #  <li>A top prospect for an official format for the European Commission.
> #  <li>Our best chance to fight vendor lock-in associated with 
> proprietary formats.
> #  <li>All of the above.
> # </ol>
> # <p>The correct answer is (f) All of the above.
> 
> Without "type=a" (and without CSS), the last paragraph doesn't make sense.
> 

| <ul>
| <li><font color="red">answer 1</font></li>
| <li><font color="red">answer 2</font></li>
| <li><font color="red">answer 3</font></li>
| <li><font color="green">answer 4</font></li>
| <li><font color="red">answer 5</font></li>
| </ol>
|
| <p>The correct answer is in green.</p>

This is an equivelant situation, yet I'm sure you'll agree that it's not 
semantic at all. The point is that it's possible to have a document 
refer to a specific way it's presented, but it's a bad idea to do so 
because that presentation might change. In your example, the list could 
have been ordered with numbers or capital letters with colons (i.e. 
"F:"), or anything else and it would have had the same meaning. In mine, 
it could have been blue and yellow (for colorblind people), or had a 
checkmark as the list item, and again would have meant the same thing. 
In both cases, and in every other similar case, it's the fact that the 
content referred to the presentation that caused problems.

-- 
dolphinling
<http://dolphinling.net/>
Received on Wednesday, 12 October 2005 07:54:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:43 UTC