Re: Update to "Unordered Lists" QA tip

Hi Brian,

Thank you very much for your continued work on this tip. I have had a 
look at your latest draft, and have a few suggestions, see below.
items in /slashes/ are <em>,

On Aug 9, 2005, at 6:47, Brian Huisman wrote:
> I have updated this tip somewhat with the feedback given.  I changed 
> the title, shortened up the middle and even managed to rearrange the 
> first section so the "good" example is first :)
>
> The updated version can be found here, like before: 
> <http://www.greywyvern.com/code/unordered-lists>

* Title: nice. Suggested alternative (just in case): "Use list markup 
for list content", which has a "why would anyone do something else" 
feel to it.

* Intro (smart). could be more punchy. My suggestion:
[[
When presenting content /listing/ items or ideas, it is almost always 
better to use list markup
   { example 1 }
Why is it much better than the following?
   { example 2 }
- list markup is using the language with the intented /semantics/
- its is structurally neater
- it is easier, not harder, to style.
]]

* 1st part (semantic). I would move most of the ideas into Style and 
Structure, and replace with:
[[
   Semantic
Markup languages design elements with specific semantics. <p> is for 
paragraphs, not just for blocks (that is what <div> is about). 
Similarly, list have specific elements (ul, ol, dl), for /unordered/, 
/ordered/ and /definition/ lists, respectively. Using them for listing 
items should be a natural practice.

Just as it has become natural to use <strong> instead of <font> or 
<span>, it should be natural to use list markup for list content.
]]

* 2nd part (Structure). Not much to change. I would change the intro, 
replace:
"The uses of lists extend far beyond just lists of links or tables of 
contents. Take, for example,..."
with something more to the point, like
"Using list elements also make your markup more structured. Take, for 
example,..."

* I would add a third part, Style. Ideas for wording:
[[
   Style
"but lists are a harder to style with CSS, and less flexible than using 
<div>s or <span>s". This is a common misperception. List are in fact 
much more flexible style-wise than any alternative. Not only can a <ul> 
be made to look like "flat text" (using the display: inline property; 
and list-style-type: none for the <li>s), it also has a lot of 
possibilities (with the list-style* and content properties, and child 
selectors, for instance) that using a less semantic, structured markup 
would not allow. The resources in the "Further reading" sections have a 
lot of example of what can be done with list markup, CSS and a bit of 
imagination.
]]

I realize this is some heavy editing, but these are mostly suggestions, 
and open for discussion.
your thoughts?

Thanks,
-- 
olivier

Received on Wednesday, 10 August 2005 01:00:53 UTC