- From: Bruce Lawson <brucel@opera.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 08:04:12 -0000
On Tue, 10 Jan 2012 07:32:35 -0000, Hugh Guiney <hugh.guiney at gmail.com> wrote: > As I understand it, the main reason for rejecting <di> was that it > solves a problem that is allegedly CSS's job, but as an author who > uses <dl>s quite extensively, adding a grouping element would really > make my life a lot easier. > > Yes, my most common problem with <dl>s is styling them, but it's > hardly CSS's fault. What kind of styling am I attempting to do? > Mostly, to arrange them in columns. [...] > Simply put: just because the parsing algorithm is well-defined and we > can imply association sans-container, that doesn't mean authors (like > myself) won't want finer-grained control over grouping. Seems to me no need to add a new element. If <div> could be a child of <dl> then you could use that. However, it can't. I don't know why, though. bruce
Received on Tuesday, 10 January 2012 00:04:12 UTC