- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 00:15:39 +0200
- To: "Daniel Hiester" <alatus@earthlink.net>
- Cc: "www-html" <www-html@w3.org>, <www-style@w3.org>
* Daniel Hiester wrote:
>Why not have CSS attributes that make only one list element necessary?
While XHTML elements take logical semantics, CSS properties carry only
presentation semantics with no use for user agents out of the scope of
the given semantics by the author. You have think of concepts behind
XHTML elements, not in terms of "if I use this tag, it get's displayed
like that".
>We wouldn't need to have UL and OL elements.
Sure we need. How would you distinguish between an ordered and an
unorderd list if style sheets aren't applied?
>Instead of the DL, DT and DD elements, one could use a UL (or OL, whichever
>of the two remains undeprecated), and write 'list-style-type: blank' (or
>something) into the stylesheet to simply create an indentation.
Uuuh, I feared you think like that. XHTML is for
<h1>Common XML terminology</h1>
<div>
<dl>
<dt>root node</dt>
<dd>ancestor of all element nodes</dd>
</div>
not for
<very-big>Common XML terminology</very-big>
<bolded>root node</bolded>
<indent>ancestor of all element nodes</dd>
What you want or are talking of are XSL formatting objects, useless for
anything but printers.
>Or even
>better yet, use CSS's already existing 'indent' property.
text-indent.
--
Björn Höhrmann { mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de } http://www.bjoernsworld.de
am Badedeich 7 } Telefon: +49(0)4667/981028 { http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
25899 Dagebüll { PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 } http://www.learn.to/quote/
Received on Thursday, 19 July 2001 18:16:46 UTC