Re: Ordered Lists

Cindy Stanley wrote:

>> <li> is a singleton tag, requiring no closing. The end tag is optional.
>> Remove all your </li> and the document will validate under your
>transitional doctype.


From: Frank Boumphrey <bckman(at)ix.netcom.com>
>Actually the above is not a problem you are allowed to close tags if you
>want (and IMO you shoud)

I agree, but, if you leave the </li>'s in the document, it will *not*
validate. If you take them out, it *will* validate, under the transitional
doctype she is using. Something similar will happen when dealing with the
<p> elements also.

>Your problem is that you are directly nesting ordered lists
>
><ol>
><li><a href="Camping/index">Camping</a></li>
> <ol>
> <li><a href="Camping/wawbeek">Camp Wawbeek</a></li>
>
>The spec lays out that the only allowed content of an ordered list is an li
>element

true about the specs... okay, so the above shows that you are using a ol
element w/in a ol element, and the only element legal w/in the ol is the li
element. I really never looked at it that way when dealing w/ nested ol's.
Now, that makes sense, but wonder what the results of using my suggestion
would present?

><ol>
><li><a href="Camping/index">Camping</a></li>
><li>
> <ol>
> <li><a href="Camping/wawbeek">Camp Wawbeek</a></li>
>
>(Big Snip)
> </ol>
></li>
></ol>
>
>And you will validate.

and you will validate by opting *not* to use the end li tag, which my
documents show that this is optional. Not arguing with you, just trying to
figure this out.

--
Cindy K. Stanley, SSS
Stanley Support Service

HWG hwg-techniques mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA