Hi there,

> <ol start="11"><li>First result</li>
> <li>Second...</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.


--- <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

Reply via email to