2012-07-14 10:46, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 6:22 AM, Ian Yang <ian.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
By seeing such contents, we usually code it using definition list (<dl>).
At first, I was thinking the same idea. But then I realized that stages in
a life cycle should be regarded as ordered contents.
I would recommend not over-thinking the matter. Otherwise soon you
will start wrapping your <p>s in <ol>/<li>s too to ensure they stay in
the correct order.
Indeed. The <ol> element is no more and no less ordered than <ul> or any
other element. Many HTML tag names are misleading.
(The specification points this out as well: "The order of the list of
groups, and of the names and values within each group, may be
significant.")
That's actually a questionable statement there, since it may make the
read ask whether the order of sub-elements is *generally* significant.
It's as questionable as it would be to write "The order of successive p
elements may be significant" or "The order of successive section
elements may be significant".
Yucca
