Re: Tree presented lists (was: Suggestion)

On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Daniel Hiester wrote:

>>Sure we need. How would you distinguish between an ordered and an
>>unorderd list if style sheets aren't applied?
>
>That's the idea. The only different between an ordered an unordered list
>really is a presentational matter.

Now, that simply isn't true. It's true that nowadays the lists are used to
achieve a presentational effect, but at least I code my lists as unordered,
ordered, or definition with a very specific idea of what that markup means.
The difference between ul and ol is a fine one as long as no software
reorders ul's (any examples, people? shortest first rendering for speech? UA
sort options for unordered lists?), but e.g. the one between dl's and tables
is a pretty clear cut one.

>If someone doesn't apply a stylesheet, then they probably aren't even using
>valid XHTML, unless their document simply has no presentational markup in it
>at all, and looks like an html document circa 1993.

Huh? The only reason stylesheetless documents look bare is because you're
not using your own sheet, few people are industrious enough to code
extensive semantics into their content (I'll bet you're one of them) and
because HTML does not have *enough* semantic elements to really make
extensive styling possible without marking the material with classes. This
is a reason to *add* possibilities for semantic markup, not to reduce them.

Besides, I'd be ready to go as far as to say, a higher percentage of
plain-old-HTML sites are valid than of the slick looking crowd-catchers --
those who stick to HTML only are likely to care about compatibility, whereas
those aiming at the coolest possible site cannot afford to, right now.

Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy, mailto:decoy@iki.fi, gsm: +358-50-5756111
student/math+cs/helsinki university, http://www.iki.fi/~decoy/front

Received on Friday, 20 July 2001 03:06:17 UTC