Re: List Item (LI) Suggestion

• Mail folder: html-archive
• Next message: Peter Flynn: "Re: ICADD elements in HTML"
• Previous message: Daniel W. Connolly: "Re: Tags inside themselves?? "
• Reply: Stan Newton: "Re: List Item (LI) Suggestion"

Date: Mon, 12 Sep 94 13:38:39 EDT
Message-id: <9409121018.AA04468@curia.ucc.ie>
Reply-To: pflynn@curia.ucc.ie
Originator: html-wg@oclc.org
Sender: html-wg@oclc.org
Precedence: bulk
From: pflynn@curia.ucc.ie (Peter Flynn)
To: Multiple recipients of list <html-wg@oclc.org>
Subject: Re: List Item (LI) Suggestion
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: HTML Working Group (Private)

> >1. The MENU and DIR list definitions are specifically designed for
> >rendering Menu like lists and Directory listings, respectively. Some sources 
> >suggest that DIR rendering should be multi-column. These are
> >really both inconsistent with the definition of LI as a container for
> >block items.
> 
> Sound reasonable. Anybody feel strongly one way or the other about
> this? I think we can change MENU and DIR to exclude block items
> (via exclusion exceptions, not by a change to the LI element, I'm
> afraid.)

I would have thought that MENU list items were ideally suited to LI
usage, as they're supposed to be up to one "line" long each. For DIR
I agree, some other structure may be better.

> >I'm not sure I got all the syntax correct, but my concept is that there are 
> >should be two kinds of list items, plain (LI) and extended (XLI). End tags 
> >are optional for LI and required for XLI. LI list items are single paragraph 
> >entries. XLI list items can contain multiple paragraphs, lists, forms, etc. 
> >DIR and MENU lists should allow only LI content while OL and UL can allow 
> >either.

You mean literally EITHER, or that you should be able to mix LI and XLI? 
I think if you want more freedom within list items, we should look at
expanding DL/DT/DD rather than LI.

///Peter