> The XHTML 2.0 implementation of <dl> does leave a void, though. We no
>  longer have a name-value type of list. I therefore wonder how the
> idea of  such a list is read. In structure, it would probably be
> identical to <dl>,  but in semantics and presentation, it would
> differ. Where definition lists  often are presented like this:

Have you seen the DI element?

As in:

# <dl>
#  <di>
#   <dt>Foo</dt>
#   <dd>Foo is bar</dd>
#   <dd>Foo is also bar</dd>
#  </di>
#  <di>
#   <dt>Etc.</dt>
#   <dd>Et cetera</dd>
#  </di>
# </dl>

I agree that the defined semantics for the DL, DI, DT, DD elements are a
bit weird, but structurally they are fine, I guess.


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/ >