Re: [WSG] XHTML Strict alternative to ol start=11
Without getting into the debate on the correct semantics of the dl, I have one general problem with using it (and tables) for this case: sequential numbering. Placing his list in a dl or table and manually numbering them works, but what about when a new item needs to be added to the list somewhere in the middle? He would then need to manually renumber the rest of the list. Not a big deal for a half-dozen items, but certainly a pain for 100. I'm not sure what the rational for dropping the start= from ol was, and at first glance it seems an odd thing to do. Like others have mention, I can see cases where it would be useful - a results list with 1,000 entry, for example, displaying 50 at a time. Be that as it may, how can we help with this problem? My initial thought, with out getting into crazy things like renumber the list via javascipt, is can you number in more of an outline format? For example: Page 1: 1. blah 2. blah 3. blah Page 2: 1. blah 2. blah 3. blah This gives an association of 1.1, 1.2, 1.3; 2.1, 2.2, 2.3. Seems semantic and works around the ordered list 'limitation.' Will this work for you? Does this work in general? Am I missing something? Tim = ~ Tim www.tjameswhite.com Get Firefox! http://www.spreadfirefox.com/?q=affiliatesid=12227t=1 __ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? http://my.yahoo.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] XHTML Strict alternative to ol start=11
Placing his list in a dl or table and manually numbering them works, but what about when a new item needs to be added to the list somewhere in the middle? I'm assuming a system like this is dynamically handled back-end, so removing this problem. I'm not sure what the rational for dropping the start= from ol was, and at first glance it seems an odd thing to do. Like others have mention, I can see cases where it would be useful - a results list with 1,000 entry, for example, displaying 50 at a time. But you've got to think in terms of a page - the first list item in a page is still the first list item, regardless of where it comes in the multi-page 1,000 results. --- Vivabit Ltd., London http://vivabit.co.uk @media 2005 http://www.atmedia2005.co.uk ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] XHTML Strict alternative to ol start=11
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 20:26:26 -, Patrick Griffiths [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I'm not sure what the rational for dropping the start= from ol
was, and at first glance it seems an odd thing to do. Like others have
mention, I can see cases where it would be useful - a results list
with
1,000 entry, for example, displaying 50 at a time.
But you've got to think in terms of a page - the first list item in a
page is still the first list item, regardless of where it comes in the
multi-page 1,000 results.
I think that's the point to add this information, that it IS a fragment
of 1000-item list.
For me it's quite silly that you're supposed to make list *look* like
a fragment (css), but list is not allowed to *be* a fragment (xhtml).
There is a practical problem. How stylesheet is supposed to set
initial value for a counter? ul class=starts_at_11?
rant
Oh, I just can't wait till CSS is extended to support this:
ul[start] {counter-reset: item attr(start);}
/rant
--
regards, Kornel Lesiski
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
RE: [WSG] XHTML Strict alternative to ol start=11
Patrick wrote: doesn't work all the time, but as a general rule: when you have this type of inconsistencies, try and be very specific with regards to all margins and paddings. Otherwise, you're leaving the ones you don't specify up to the rendering engine's default, which may well vary from browser to browser. In this instance, all the padding, margin, border, etc. were initially set to zero so that shouldn't be the cause here. In the end I couldn't find the cause of this IE issue, so I've gone with a table. I can always have it changed if I discover the cause and a fix. Thanks for your help everyone. All the best, -- Ian Fenn Chopstix Media http://www.chopstixmedia.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] XHTML Strict alternative to ol start=11
In this instance, all the padding, margin, border, etc. were initially
set
to zero so that shouldn't be the cause here. In the end I couldn't
find the
cause of this IE issue, so I've gone with a table. I can always have
it
changed if I discover the cause and a fix.
Hi Ian. I don't know if I've missed something, but in your original
example:
dldt99./dtdda href=Article title/a/dd
dt100./dtdda href=Article title/a - span
class=newNEW/span/dd
/dl
and:
dt { float:left; }
dd { margin:4px 8px; }
The problem is in your margin for the dd's and nudging them out of line
with the dt's. Try margin: 0 8px 4px 8px; instead, or applying some
kind of combination of margins to the dt's (or first dt).
---
Vivabit Ltd., London
http://vivabit.co.uk
@media 2005
http://www.atmedia2005.co.uk
- Original Message -
From: Ian Fenn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 9:51 PM
Subject: RE: [WSG] XHTML Strict alternative to ol start=11
Patrick wrote:
doesn't work all the time, but as a general rule: when you have this
type of inconsistencies, try and be very specific with regards to
all
margins and paddings. Otherwise, you're leaving the ones you don't
specify up to the rendering engine's default, which may well vary
from
browser to browser.
In this instance, all the padding, margin, border, etc. were initially
set
to zero so that shouldn't be the cause here. In the end I couldn't
find the
cause of this IE issue, so I've gone with a table. I can always have
it
changed if I discover the cause and a fix.
Thanks for your help everyone.
All the best,
--
Ian Fenn
Chopstix Media
http://www.chopstixmedia.com/
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
Re: [WSG] XHTML Strict alternative to ol start=11
On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 23:19:02 +, Ian Fenn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Had I been doing it with HTML Transitional or similar, I would have displayed a second page of results as follows: ol start=11liFirst result/li liSecond.../li ... /ol Do you have any suggestions as to how I could achieve a similar effect with XHTML Strict? I suggest to ignore specs and continue using start attribute, because -- as you see -- specs are wrong. Start belongs to content, and not (only) presentation. You may create your own DTD if you care about validation. -- regards, Kornel Lesiski ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] XHTML Strict alternative to ol start=11
See, I'd say a table or a definition list. I think I'm one of the
very few people who actually supports the loss of the start=
attribute.
An ordered list means there is an order, *not* that there is anything
particular assocated with that order. So, think about it in terms of
set theory, if you will. An unordered list is like a set: {1, 2, 3}
which is the same as {3, 1, 2}. An ordered list, like an ordered set
- (1,2,3) which is distinct from (3, 1, 2). But a definition list is
like a mapping:
{ (1, 1), (2, 5), (3, 6) } which, in set theory, is just a subset of
{1, 2, 3} x {1, 5, 6}.
Apologies to those amongst you who don't do set theory. It'd be
better with diagrams. But the point is that if you want a starting
attribute in an ordered list you're actually setting up an assocation
between the number and the content of the list item. So you need a
definition list. Because an ordered list is just a way of defining a
relationship between the parts of the ordered list, not between the
parts of the ordered list and something outside.
So, i'd go with dl. My two cents.
Regards,
mjec
--
http://mine.mjec.net/
On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 11:53:32 -, Kornel Lesinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 23:19:02 +, Ian Fenn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Had I been doing it with HTML Transitional or similar, I would have
displayed a second page of results as follows:
ol start=11liFirst result/li
liSecond.../li
...
/ol
Do you have any suggestions as to how I could achieve a similar effect
with XHTML Strict?
I suggest to ignore specs and continue using start attribute,
because -- as you see -- specs are wrong.
Start belongs to content, and not (only) presentation.
You may create your own DTD if you care about validation.
--
regards, Kornel Lesiski
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
Re: [WSG] XHTML Strict alternative to ol start=11
See, I'd say a table or a definition list. I think I'm one of the very few people who actually supports the loss of the start= attribute. I'd go with Michael, on both points. Table would be fine, but definition list is probably better. And the start attribute is bad because the first item in an ordered list is always, well, the first item! All this talk of writing your own DTD is a bit nuts if you ask me. The standards are in place for a reason. Patrick --- Vivabit Ltd., London http://vivabit.co.uk @media 2005 http://www.atmedia2005.co.uk ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] XHTML Strict alternative to ol start=11
Use Javascript. Insert the content with innerHTML. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] XHTML Strict alternative to ol start=11
The Bo$$ wrote: Use Javascript. Insert the content with innerHTML. How accessible...and semantic! Write valid code, so you pass automated validators, then use JS to basically mess it up in whatever way you like? Sorry, but that's hardly the point of web standards, imho. -- Patrick H. Lauke _ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] XHTML Strict alternative to ol start=11
On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 23:07:39 +1100, Michael Cordover
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
An ordered list means there is an order, *not* that there is anything
particular assocated with that order. So, think about it in terms of
set theory, if you will. An unordered list is like a set: {1, 2, 3}
which is the same as {3, 1, 2}. An ordered list, like an ordered set
- (1,2,3) which is distinct from (3, 1, 2). But a definition list is
like a mapping:
{ (1, 1), (2, 5), (3, 6) } which, in set theory, is just a subset of
{1, 2, 3} x {1, 5, 6}.
Apologies to those amongst you who don't do set theory. It'd be
better with diagrams. But the point is that if you want a starting
attribute in an ordered list you're actually setting up an assocation
between the number and the content of the list item. So you need a
definition list. Because an ordered list is just a way of defining a
relationship between the parts of the ordered list, not between the
parts of the ordered list and something outside.
Interesting, but I don't agree :)
IMO list items are 1st, 2nd, 3rd and so on, and this makes sense
as long as all list items are together, but sometimes you need to split
the list (for example when you display 10 results per page),
so then start makes sense.
There are some usability problems:
WAI says that document must make sense without stylesheets.
From a users point of view:
1. a
2. b
3. c
is very different from:
11. a
12. b
13. c
I don't think that definition list can replace that either.
dt11/dtddFoo/dd
Foo does not define 11.
It's just supposed to be 11th element of some list.
--
regards, Kornel Lesiski
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
RE: [WSG] XHTML Strict alternative to ol start=11
Hi,
Patrick wrote:
How accessible...and semantic! Write valid code, so you pass automated
validators, then use JS to basically mess it up in whatever way you
like? Sorry, but that's hardly the point of web standards, imho.
Indeed. At the moment I'm trying to use a definition list but I'm not
getting very far. I've got the following markup:
dldt99./dtdda href=Article title/a/dd
dt100./dtdda href=Article title/a - span
class=newNEW/span/dd
/dl
And the following css:
dt { float:left; }
dd { margin:4px 8px; }
This looks fine in firefox, but with IE 6 (Windows XP) the contents of the
first dt are appearing slightly raised in comparison to the contents of the
following dd. The other dts and dds are being displayed fine...
All the best,
--
Ian Fenn
Chopstix Media
http://www.chopstixmedia.com/
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
Re: [WSG] XHTML Strict alternative to ol start=11
Kornel Lesinski wrote: I don't think that definition list can replace that either. dt11/dtddFoo/dd Foo does not define 11. It's just supposed to be 11th element of some list. However, the spec is soo vague with regards to the true semantics of DL, that the above use seems, if not ideal, at least passable. If you consider the W3C example of marking up a dialog with DL, you could also argue that a speaker's lines don't define the speaker (unless we want to get metaphysical about define). In short, I'd class this as another one of those cases where the restrictive options provided by (X)HTML can't always be used to unequivocally mark up real world content... -- Patrick H. Lauke _ redux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] XHTML Strict alternative to ol start=11
Ian Fenn wrote:
dt { float:left; }
dd { margin:4px 8px; }
This looks fine in firefox, but with IE 6 (Windows XP) the contents of the
first dt are appearing slightly raised in comparison to the contents of the
following dd. The other dts and dds are being displayed fine...
doesn't work all the time, but as a general rule: when you have this
type of inconsistencies, try and be very specific with regards to all
margins and paddings. Otherwise, you're leaving the ones you don't
specify up to the rendering engine's default, which may well vary from
browser to browser.
--
Patrick H. Lauke
_
re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
[latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]
www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk
http://redux.deviantart.com
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
Re: [WSG] XHTML Strict alternative to ol start=11
Hi there, ol start=11liFirst result/li liSecond.../li ... /ol My two cents: use this method. It's one of those times that the standards are too strict without providing a robust alternative (more the fault of browsers than standards, though). I would support the idea of using Transitional on those pages, taking a very clear case to the client based on *the best result for the user*. If they are serious about doing the right thing by their users they should be open to discussing an approved dispensation for that specific use. At the end of the day, my guess is a user with serious accessibility needs would rather the page actually worked than have it break but conform to the perfect standard. The other argument is that in terms of semantics, the results set is one long list. The semantic meaning of each point is a certain order in those results (regardless of the fact the list has been split into smaller pages for ease of use). For that reason I'd avoid using a table or definition list. I guess this really sums up a sort of pragmatic fallback approach: when pure standards fail, go with the solution that works and is the best actual result for the user. If the client refuses to budge on the standard, I guess you're dealing with Cargo Cult Standards and you'll have to use a DL or table (probably a table, semantically a little dubious but at least it gives structure :)). Hope this helps. h -- --- http://cheshrkat.blogspot.com/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] XHTML Strict alternative to ol start=11
Ian Fenn wrote: Had I been doing it with HTML Transitional or similar, I would have displayed a second page of results as follows: ol start=11liFirst result/li liSecond.../li ... /ol Do you have any suggestions as to how I could achieve a similar effect with XHTML Strict? I was thinking of using a CSS counter but I wasn't sure how that would play with several pages of dynamic results. The painful answer is: you're supposed to do it via CSS, but unfortunately support for counters is spotty at best...so you're left with either reverting to transitional, or writing your own DTD. -- Patrick H. Lauke _ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] XHTML Strict alternative to ol start=11
Quoting Patrick H. Lauke [EMAIL PROTECTED]: The painful answer is: you're supposed to do it via CSS, but unfortunately support for counters is spotty at best...so you're left with either reverting to transitional, or writing your own DTD. Hmm... Thanks Patrick. Neither of these are really an option. I guess I could use a table... in this context do you think it would be acceptable? All the best, -- Ian Fenn ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] XHTML Strict alternative to ol start=11
Ian Fenn wrote: I guess I could use a table... in this context do you think it would be acceptable? I'd give that a tentative yes (while putting on my flame-proof piyamas), if the number has some sort of meaning. Heck, even if it denotes order or position I'd go with it. table thead th scope=colposition/th th scope=colresult/th /thead tbody tr td11/td tdfirst result/td /tr tr td12/td tdsecond result/td /tr /tbody /table -- Patrick H. Lauke _ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
