- From: Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
- Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 22:49:28 -0800
- To: Daniel Glazman <glazman@netscape.com>, <www-html@w3.org>
On 3/10/03 7:29 AM, "Daniel Glazman" <glazman@netscape.com> wrote: > > Etan Wexler wrote: > >>> If I receive a text with questions numbered 1 to 6 in a list >>> and only have answers to 2 to 4, I may want to start a list with start="2". >> >> Sure, I agree that one may want to start a list at a number other than 1. >> What I don't agree is that a 'start' attribute is a good solution. What if >> you have only answers to 2, 4, and 5? With a simplistic 'start' attribute, >> you cannot express the correct information. > > Strange answer, indeed. In summary, you tell me that my argument is not > relevant because users may as well want to type lists than do not > represent a range. I agree; but that does not suppress the fact they > also may want to do ranges! Yes Daniel, your analysis is correct. Unfortunately this flawed argument style that you have dissected appears to be used a lot in W3C lists. >> An element of a list-marker type >> accomodates both this case and many more with facility. Consider: >> >> <ol> >> <li><marker>2.</marker> ...</li> >> <li><marker>4.</marker> ...</li> >> <li><marker>5.</marker> ...</li> >> </ol> > > In an ideal world, we would have IDREFs and CSS styles allowing to do > everything. We're not in that world. Indeed. >>> Not all instances of lists with a start index > 1 are continuing lists. >> >> I'm glad that you raised this point. I had failed to consider it. But now, >> having considered it, I remain at my original position. I do not think that >> a 'start' attribute is the solution, as noted above. > > Still disagreeing. And I agree 100% with Daniel on this. >>> The "let's do that with CSS" answer is not more satisfying. The fact >>> that the list's numbering starts at 2 instead of 1 is not purely >>> presentational but also content-related. >> >> I half agree. Numbering becomes an essential part of content in cases where >> hypertext does not apply. This is false. Numbering and hypertext _can_ be codependent, but they can also be completely orthogonal. >> Printed documents like legal briefs are prime >> examples. And, without a doubt, people will use XHTML 2 to comment on >> print-only documents. Numbering therefore remains a real concern. > > Woof. From 1991 until now, the number of "without a doubt" predictions > that finally became true is imho very limited... Agreed. >> What I must emphasize, though, is that reference by number (or other mark) >> is a leftover of non-hyper text. In a pure hypertext, reference would be by >> links. If, in your example, links connected each answer to the corresponding >> question, a user agent could follow the links and present the corresponding >> list item markers with your answers. > > Right. IDREFs. See below. > >> In pure hypertext, numbering typically is presentational. The >> machine-readable link forms the stable basis of the reference mechanism >> available to the user. The particular numbers used as labels become >> unimportant; even if the numbers change in the original, the change >> propagates effortlessly through all affected documents. > > That's far too idealistic. Imagine a list of questions but they don't > have IDs, you can't target them. You can't modify that because that part > of the document is readonly. What do you do ? > > </Daniel> I agree with Daniel's sentiment and his original message. There are absolutely uses for start and value attributes. I can see marking up the markers with tags rather than attributes, but certainly in the immediate future it makes sense to undeprecate start and value while a better solution is worked out. I see no problem with having both solutions coexist. Tantek
Received on Tuesday, 11 March 2003 01:36:29 UTC