On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Ian Yang wrote:
>
> > Like above examples, the following is not well organized, and it's
>> > also a pain to read it:
>> >
>> >
>> > Lorem Ipsum
>> > Sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
>> > Aliquam Viverra
>> > Fringilla
>>[... etc ..
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:56 AM, Leif Halvard Silli <
xn--mlform-...@xn--mlform-iua.no> wrote:
> Ian Yang on Thu, 19 Jul 2012 15:04:48 +0800, wrote:
>
> >> From previous discussions, some people had suggested possible markup for
> >> "life cycle" type contents. And personally I will stick to using
Ian Yang on Thu, 19 Jul 2012 15:04:48 +0800, wrote:
>> From previous discussions, some people had suggested possible markup for
>> "life cycle" type contents. And personally I will stick to using until
>> there is a better solution.
>
> There is still one thing left unanswered. And that's whethe
Ian Hickson on Mon, 16 Jul 2012 04:31:44 + (UTC), wrote:
> It's certainly true that many element names are derived more from
> historical accidents than their current semantics, but and are
> semantically quite different, as the spec describes.
>
> Specifically, implies that the order of
On 20/07/12 10:52 AM, Ian Yang wrote:
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 2:02 AM, Alex Bishop wrote:
On 19/07/2012 08:04, Ian Yang wrote:
Since the *optional *use of in could solve many problems, may we
have being valid in?
Probably not, as it has similar drawbacks as the proposed element:
htt
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 2:02 AM, Alex Bishop wrote:
> On 19/07/2012 08:04, Ian Yang wrote:
>
>> Since the *optional *use of in could solve many problems, may we
>>
>> have being valid in ?
>>
>
> Probably not, as it has similar drawbacks as the proposed element:
>
>
> http://wiki.whatwg.org/w
On 19/07/2012 08:04, Ian Yang wrote:
Since the *optional *use of in could solve many problems, may we
have being valid in ?
Probably not, as it has similar drawbacks as the proposed element:
http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ#HTML_should_group_.3Cdt.3Es_and_.3Cdd.3Es_together_in_.3Cdi.3Es.21
>From previous discussions, some people had suggested possible markup for
"life cycle" type contents. And personally I will stick to using until
there is a better solution.
There is still one thing left unanswered. And that's whether we will be
able to put inside .
Let's consider we used often
On Mon, 16 Jul 2012, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> 2012-07-16 5:36, Ian Yang wrote:
> >
> > Imo, means the order of the items is unimportant, not browsers
> > can render the items in any order.
>
> But if the order is unimportant, there still _is_ an order.
The specification even mentions that the
2012/7/16 Jukka K. Korpela
> 2012-07-16 5:36, Ian Yang wrote:
>
>> Imo, means the order of the items is unimportant, not browsers can
>> render the items in any order.
>>
>
> But if the order is unimportant, there still _is_ an order. Being
> unordered would be something else.
The "order" you
2012/7/16 Ian Hickson
> On Sat, 14 Jul 2012, Ian Yang wrote:
> > Recently I was involved in a project. One of its pages has a special
> > content which is like a "life cycle". There are several stages in the
> > cycle, each stage has a term followed by some text describing the term.
> > Let's tak
2012-07-16 5:36, Ian Yang wrote:
Imo, means the order of the items is unimportant, not browsers can
render the items in any order.
But if the order is unimportant, there still _is_ an order. Being
unordered would be something else. And what would it matter to indicate
the order as important
On Sat, 14 Jul 2012, Ian Yang wrote:
>
> Recently I was involved in a project. One of its pages has a special
> content which is like a "life cycle". There are several stages in the
> cycle, each stage has a term followed by some text describing the term.
> Let's take the life cycle of butterfl
2012/7/16 Leif H Silli
> Sat, 14 Jul 2012 23:53:32 +0800, from Ian Yang
>
>> Okay, it seems that one of the ideas I mentioned in my original email
>> needs to be revamped.
>>
>
>> I was saying that using general heading () and paragraph () loses
>> the meaning of "definition term" and "definition
2012/7/16 Jukka K. Korpela
> 2012-07-15 17:40, Ian Yang wrote:
> > Throughout the article, I saw it mentioned "bullets" and "numbers"
> > frequently. However, that's just browsers' default rendering of and
> > .
>
> It's the only real difference between the two.
Sorry, I still don't get it. m
Sat, 14 Jul 2012 23:53:32 +0800, from Ian Yang
Okay, it seems that one of the ideas I mentioned in my original email
needs
to be revamped.
I was saying that using general heading () and paragraph () loses
the meaning of "definition term" and "definition description", but I didn't
realize t
2012-07-15 17:40, Ian Yang wrote:
> Throughout the article, I saw it mentioned "bullets" and "numbers"
> frequently. However, that's just browsers' default rendering of and
> .
It's the only real difference between the two.
> As a coder, personally I don't care how browsers render them by
> de
2012/7/15 Jukka K. Korpela
> 2012-07-14 18:51, Ian Yang wrote:
>
> If is no more and no less ordered than ,
>> what's the purpose of its introduction?
>>
>
> The real purposes, in the dawn of HTML, were that and correspond
> to numbered and bulleted lists, respectively, reflecting two very co
2012-07-14 18:51, Ian Yang wrote:
If is no more and no less ordered than ,
what's the purpose of its introduction?
The real purposes, in the dawn of HTML, were that and
correspond to numbered and bulleted lists, respectively, reflecting two
very common concepts in word processors. This is
Okay, it seems that one of the ideas I mentioned in my original email needs
to be revamped.
I was saying that using general heading () and paragraph () loses
the meaning of "definition term" and "definition description", but I didn't
realize that using loses the meaning of "definition list". That
2012/7/14 Jukka K. Korpela
> Indeed. The element is no more and no less ordered than or any
> other element. Many HTML tag names are misleading.
>
That's interesting. If is no more and no less ordered than ,
what's the purpose of its introduction? Could you provide detailed
explanations or ex
2012/7/14 Anne van Kesteren
> I would recommend not over-thinking the matter. Otherwise soon you
> will start wrapping your s in /s too to ensure they stay in
> the correct order.
>
That wouldn't be the problem. General s of an article never are list
contents, so we surely won't wrap them in /s.
On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> 2012-07-14 10:46, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> (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 state
2012-07-14 10:46, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 6:22 AM, Ian Yang wrote:
By seeing such contents, we usually code it using definition list ().
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
On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 6:22 AM, Ian Yang wrote:
> By seeing such contents, we usually code it using definition list ().
> 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 matt
Hi chief editors and everyone else,
How have you been?
Recently I was involved in a project. One of its pages has a special
content which is like a "life cycle". There are several stages in the
cycle, each stage has a term followed by some text describing the term.
Let's take the life cycle of bu
26 matches
Mail list logo
