On 20/07/12 10:52 AM, Ian Yang wrote:
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 2:02 AM, Alex Bishop<alexbis...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 19/07/2012 08:04, Ian Yang wrote:
Since the *optional *use of<li> in<dl> could solve many problems, may we
have<li> being valid in<dl>?
Probably not, as it has similar drawbacks as the proposed<di> element:
http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ#HTML_should_group_.3Cdt.3Es_and_.3Cdd.3Es_together_in_.3Cdi.3Es.21
Thanks. However, the drawbacks mentioned in that document is about the
nonexistent<di>, not the existent<li>.
Yes, that whole section is misleading, as has been discussed before:
- The benefit of <di> or <li> is not just styling
- There's no indication that a CSS solution will be developed anyway
- As you say, none of those reasons apply to <li>
<li> in<dl> is rendered without problems in IE6+, FF3.6+, Chrome, and
Safari. Only in Opera that definition term and the bullet aren't at the
same line.
Furthermore, browsers need to be compliant with the standards, not the
standers need to be compliant with browsers. If the latter were true, we
wouldn't have had so many new HTML5 elements to use.
Well, the browser vendors need to agree somewhat before the standard
becomes a standard.
And at the moment there's lots of cool new stuff to implement, as well
as many browser discrepancies and *real* bugs to fix, so I think it will
be some time before anyone looks at this issue properly.
regards,
Sean
