Hi Ted
While I appreciate your fears about improper use of other elements reaching
the heights of our redoubtable friend the table, I don't think they apply to
this suggested use of definition lists. My reasoning - and I have used
lists in such a way myself - is that this particular kind of list seems to
be loosely defined to intentionally invite creative interpretation of its
usefulness. Of course I can't know this for sure, I only infer from the
evidence I see in the W3C's papers. Such a *stretching* of its meaning is
nothing like the outright snap when someone first used a table without a
single shred of tabular data in sight. For example:
<dl>
<dt>Pages on this site</dt>
<dd>Page 1</dd>
<dd>Page 2</dd>
<dd>Page 3</dd>
<dt>Pictures</dt>
<dd>Picture 1</dd>
etc...
</dl>
It's still a list. The <dd>s contain data directly related to the <dt>s.
In my opinion the list is doing its job, and by that I mean showing related
items of data in a simple and meaningful way.
Of course, I could be wrong...
Thanks,
Iain
------------------
Iain Gardiner
http://www.firelightning.com
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Ted Drake
Sent: 23 November 2004 17:23
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [WSG] Fieldsets can be used outside the box - Correct use of
<fieldset>
I can appreciate the dl approach. I'm often worried that I will end up
abusing the dl as the table was abused in the past. It is true that the dt
could label the lists and the dd's could include the list elements. The list
items would be related. I think I will even re-approach our page next week.
Thanks
Ted
******************************************************
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
******************************************************
