Welcome to WebHeadStart.org

Web Technologies

Sponsored By

WebHeadStart.org is currently in beta.
Please pardon our appearance as we work to provide you with the most comprehensive reference on today's web technologies.

Interested in advertising on WebHeadStart? Become an advertising partner today!

[WWW-HTML Mailing List Archive Home] [Messages By Thread] [Messages By Date]

RE: dl, dd, dt in XHTML 2.0

From: Marcos Caceres <marcos@datadriven.com.au>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 18:48:57 +1000
To: "'Jens Meiert'" <jens.meiert@erde3.com>, <www-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <007b01c31eac$a7feaec0$277fb583@cifkgdutytut2>

Hey Jens,
I agree that domain specific semantics for a term might call for only
one definition (as is the case with an ontology like Dublin Core Terms
or a in a General Definition part of a W3C spec doc). However, any
dictionary that I've ever looked at always contains one or more
definitions for a term. I don't see any reason why you wouldn't have
multiple definitions for a term. For instance, the word 'Cat' can be a
furry four legged creature, or an abbreviation for the type of boat
'catamaran'.

In XHTML 2.0, how I structure my terms and definitions is *open* (or
ambiguous) in the RelaxNG implementation:

  <define name="dl">
      <element name="dl">
        <ref name="dl.attlist"/>
        <oneOrMore>
          <choice>
        <ref name="dt"/>
        <ref name="dd"/>
          </choice>
        </oneOrMore>
      </element>
    </define>

Correct me if I'm wrong, but according to the above definition, I can
have one or more dt or dl in any order and it should still be valid. I
would be nice to hear why you don't agree with my suggestion of
structuring terms and definitions through encapsulation. 

Thanks again for the feedback, 
Marcos 
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Jens Meiert [mailto:jens.meiert@erde3.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, 20 May 2003 5:46 PM
To: Marcos Caceres; www-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: dl, dd, dt in XHTML 2.0

Is there any object out there having more than o n e definition? Thought
a
definition implies only one exact and precise annotation.


 Jens Meiert.


PS.
I know what you mean, Marcos, but I do not agree to your suggestion.



> Dear all, 
> 
> This has probably already been proposed a number of times, but I'm
just
> wondering if it wouldn't make more 'semantic' sense to encapsulate dd
> elements inside the dt element in xhtml 2.0. 
> 
> For instance, 
> 
>  
> 
> <dl>
> 
>   <dt>My term
> 
>             <dd>This is the first definition</dd>
> 
> <dd>This is the second definition</dd>
> 
>  </dt>
> 
> </dl>
> 
>  
> 
> At the moment, it would seem that the semantic relationship between
the 
> dt
> and the dd(s) elements is only implicit as it is positional (and only
> perhaps visually semantic when rendered), rather than explicit through
> encapsulation. Less importantly, encapsulation dd inside dt would also
> follows the structure for coding every other type of the list module
in
> xhtml 2.0.. aside from nesting of list terms and definition elements. 
> which
> might be something else to consider all together for definition lists.
> 
>  
> 
> When I think about it some more, doing this kind of nesting may also 
> require
> the renaming of the dl, dd, dt, or even adding some sort of container 
> that
> wraps around a definition.. Something different like this:
> 
>  
> 
> <dl>
> 
>     <definition>
> 
> <dt>My term</dt>
> 
>             <dd>This is the a definition</dd>
> 
> <dd>This is the another definition</dd>
> 
>       </definition>
> 
> </dl>
> 
>  
> 
> Just a thought. Let me know what you think, 
> 
> Marcos
> 
> 


-- 
Jens Meiert

Steubenstr. 28
D-26123 Oldenburg

Telefon +49 (0)441 99 86 147
Telefax +49 (0)89 1488 2325 91
Mobil +49 (0)175 78 4146 5

eMail <jens@meiert.com>
Internet <http://meiert.com >
Received on Tuesday, 20 May 2003 04:49:48 GMT
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS! Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | WebHeadStart.org © 2005 All Rights Reserved.