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: Comments on the XHTML 2.0 WD

From: Kelly Miller <lightsolphoenix@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 14:40:20 -0400
Message-ID: <42961814.8080901@gmail.com>
To: David Håsäther <hasather@gmail.com>
CC: www-html@w3.org, www-html-editor@w3.org

David Håsäther wrote:

> 3. In the "XHTML List Module"[4], the content model for dl is:
>
>   label?, (( dt | dd)+ | di+)
>
> This means that the definition data can appear before the term, which 
> would be illogical. This should be changed to:
>
>   label?, ((dt, dd)+ | di+)
>
> Also, the content model for di is:
>
>   ( dt+, dd*)
>
> This means that no definition data is required. Unless there is a 
> specific reason for this, it should be changed to:
>
>   (dt, dd)+
>

Actually, I'd say it should be label?, ((dt+, dd*)+) (this creates a 
list of just dt's, or dt's with dd's, but no lists that start with dd's 
or only contain dd's).

It is possible to have a term without a definition (though it makes 
sense), but having a definition without a term makes no sense.

-- 
http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/  - Get Firefox!
http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/  - Reclaim Your Inbox!
Received on Thursday, 26 May 2005 19:06:06 GMT
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS! Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | WebHeadStart.org © 2005 All Rights Reserved.