Re: Ordered Lists
by "Cindy Stanley, SSS WebWorks" <stanleysupport(at)prodigy.net>
||Sat, 2 Sep 2000 01:54:25 -0400
||"Frank Boumphrey" <bckman(at)ix.netcom.com>,
From: Frank Boumphrey <bckman(at)ix.netcom.com>
>I should also have mentioned that you version has the nested ol elements a
>children of li elements, unlike the original, so it should validate unlike
"unlike the original" is not the case. The only thing I did w/ the original
document in question was simply highlight the </li>'s and delete them. I did
not add anything, nor restructure any original html.
Cindy K. Stanley
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Cindy Stanley, SSS WebWorks" <stanleysupport(at)prodigy.net>
>To: "Frank Boumphrey" <bckman(at)ix.netcom.com>; <hwg-techniques(at)hwg.org>
>> Cindy Stanley wrote:
>> >> <li> is a singleton tag, requiring no closing. The end tag is
>> >> Remove all your </li> and the document will validate under your
>> > >transitional doctype.
>> >>but, it does (validate)... go figure.
>> From: Frank Boumphrey <bckman(at)ix.netcom.com>
>> >then the validator you are using is wrong.
>> hmmm ... I don't think so, at least not in my opinion :)
>> >Try using the W3C validator written incidently by an HWG member!
>> "Incidently", that is the only validator *this HWG member* uses. I would
>> have never mentioned it validated, if I hadn't checked w/ the W3C first.
>> see for yourself
HWG hwg-techniques mailing list archives,
maintained by Webmasters @ IWA