On 27-May-05, at 19:43, Kelly Miller wrote:
> Maxwell Terpstra wrote:
>> In the case where additional mark-up is necessary, a definition list 
>> can be nested inside of the list-item.
I should clarify that my comments weren't about navigational lists in 
particular.  I was objecting mainly to changes to the already 
standardized ordered and unordered lists.

> Then having <nl> is pointless, because that makes <nl> no different 
> from <ul>.
Right now, <nl> _isn't_ much different from <ul>, except for the hint 
from the base element that's it's a list of links.  Even so, I don't 
think the navigation list element is "pointless," since it breaks a 
very common use of lists into a new category, and allows UAs to present 
them more appropriately.

> <nl>
>    <li href="#">
>        <dl>
>            <dt>Link 1</dt>
>            <dd>This is the first link.</dd>
>        </dl>
>    </li>
>    <li href="#">
>        <dl>
>            <dt>Link 2</dt>
>            <dd>This is the second link.</dd>
>        </dl>
>    </li>
> </nl>
Obviously, this set up is less than ideal.  However, I would argue that 
this is a very odd content model for a navigational menu.  Can you give 
an example of an actual situation where a menu would actually require a 
marked-up description for every link?  The current example is painfully 
redundant, and I would say that any more detailed description belongs 
at the top of the content of the linked page, not next to the link.  If 
your particular situation is really this complex, then you shouldn't be 
using the nl structure (at least, not as it currently stands).  There's 
no reason not to use a plain definition list if that's what's best 
suited to your content model.

Either way, what you're asking for is more structure for lists of 
links.  This is very clearly the domain of the <nl> element, and not of 
<ul> or <ol>.


--Maxwell Terpstra