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: Jens Meiert <jens.meiert@erde3.com>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 11:09:41 +0200 (MEST)
To: "Marcos Caceres" <marcos@datadriven.com.au>, www-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <16366.1053421781@www21.gmx.net>

Hi Marcos,


first and in principle, I do (or did) not agree because 'definition'
inherently symbolizes a single (!) and precise annotation for an object or anything
else. See <http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/def.html >: 'A definition is a
statement or other presentation that indicates what a word or other expression
refers to or otherwise means'.

Second, assuming a wider comprehension, you should use either a extended
version of the current definition list (like I suggested in the second email),
or (and now I agree) redefine the existing tag(s).

One remark: Your example is IMHO not convenient, because the second 'cat
definition' here complies to an acronym.


Best regards,
 Jens.



> 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 
>  

<snip />


-- 
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 05:09:52 GMT
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS! Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | WebHeadStart.org © 2005 All Rights Reserved.