- From: dolphinling <lists@dolphinling.net>
- Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 02:49:27 -0400
Michel Fortin wrote: > (Note that everything applying to normal lists in this message could > also apply to definition lists and tables.) > > The ongoing thread about a global href attribute versus a block-level > <a> element made me think of a similar situation concerning <ins> and > <del>. How can we markup removed or inserted list items? Here's a > general idea: > > <ul> > <ins><li>Some list item</li></ins> > <del><li>Another list item</li></del> > </ul> > > But this is invalid. According to the spec the content model for <ul> is > "zero or more <li> elements". > > Changing this to allow the above markup has consequences on the DOM: for > instance we could no longer iterate on the content of a list element and > expect to catch all of its list items. What's more, it's not backwards compatible. I would *love* it if it were (especially because then fieldset could also go there, and repetition template attributes wouldn't have to apply to all elements), but current UAs turn <ul><ins><li>text</li></ins></ul> into <ins></ins><ul><li>text</li></ul>. I suppose it could be made valid in XML and left explicitly undefined in HTML with a big red flashing warning to authors not to use it as it'll probably change in the future, and then in 5 years or so it'll be possible to change it... But that would be icky. And that assumes there's not already legacy content that uses it. :( > To avoid the problem <ins> and > <del> could be made global attributes as some have suggested for href. That would fail when you just wanted to remove a few words from a paragraph. And having both an element and an attribute would be confusing and, again, icky. > I'm not advocating any solution right now, but I think the spec should > be either changed to allow the above, or to add global attributes, or be > clarified to explicitly disallow <ins> and <del> surrounding list items. > Also, if links are to become applicable to block-level elements, I > suggest it follows the same model. -- dolphinling <http://dolphinling.net/>
Received on Tuesday, 29 August 2006 23:49:27 UTC