Re: XHTML2 dt/dd Nesting

Stefan Ram wrote:

>>That is, your statement that "each definition term is followed by its
>>description" is a guess.
>>    
>>
>  The specification, in my opinion, needs to clarify this.
>  For example, by stating that each dt refers to all following
>  dds until the next dt.
>
This would mean changing the specification to be, for example,
<!ELEMENT dl (dt,dd*)+> (or using + instead of * for dd)

>  Or else, why should a definition list be not just this:
>  A list of definitions? I.e.,
>
><dl>
>  <df>
>    <dt>foo</dt>
>    <dd>A word</dd>
>  </df>
>  <df>
>    <dt>bar</dt>
>    <dd>A sequence of characters</dd>
>  </df>
></dl>
>
>  Where it is specified that for a df-element all dts and dds
>  form a single definition, i.e., refer to each other.
>
>  (Some months ago, a similar "bottom-up unit" was proposed.)
>
Yes, a search of the archives reveals several threads on this topic; 
many with a similar ideas, using various other tags instead of <df>, 
such as <definition>, <di> and even <li>.
Others have suggested nesting <dd> within <dt> like the following, both 
with and without the <label> element, or similar.  The following example 
was created by combining several suggestions from previous threads, and 
does not cover every alternative.
<dl>
    <dt><label>Hello</label>
        <dd xml:lang="en">A common greeting</dd>
        <dd xml:lang="fr">Bonjour</dd>
    </dt>
</dl>
  Just like most people who've discussed this (from what I've read), I 
do agree that something needs to be done to improve the structure of a 
dl.  Though, as to which method to use, I prefer the structure in the 
example above, though each one has pros and cons that would need to be 
very seriously considered before a final decision was made.

CYA
...Lachy

Received on Saturday, 1 November 2003 21:29:06 UTC