What about having it render as a standard unordered list ( ie,
bulletpoints ) until the entire set of items has been received - and
then re-rendering the list as a numbered type, all properly calculated
James Graham wrote:
Siemova wrote:
On Jan 23, 2008 10:54 AM, David Walbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
It's not that simple -- the last line should be
start = 1 + ( (number of items - 1) * step)
if it's assumed that the last item of the list is numbered one by
default.
Alas, we see the ill effects of my hastiness today! I stand happily
corrected. In that case, it's even simpler:
if start is not specified
start = 1
if reverse
start += (number of items - 1) * step
The problem that Jonas originally pointed out is that, given browsers
do incremental rendering "number of items" is not a known quantity
when the list is first rendered. For a pathological example of why
this is a problem, imagine a cgi script that just kept spewing out
reverse numbered list items, one per second, indefinitely.
It may be that in practice lists are short enough that they are
typically rendered all in one go so this wouldn't be a problem. I
don't think that's obvious, however.
