Re: A Modest Definition List Proposal
Tom Humiston <tom <at> jumpingrock.net>
2010-04-13 19:21:51 GMT
Found this unsent reply stuffed in my drafts folder...
On 19 Feb 2009, at 6:48 AM, Michel Fortin wrote:
> Definition lists are already some sort of specialized niche syntax
> within Markdown and HTML: useful when you need one, but not
> something a lot of people care for or even know it exists.
Definition lists are suitable for many kinds of term/value pairings,
and not just definitions, but I had no concept of DLs as a flexible
and handy semantic structure until I learned CSS. CSS encourages one
to consider a document's *structure* (its HTML elements) as separate
from its *presentation* (the appearance of those elements).
I now regularly mark up, say, each workshop in a list as a DT, with
its details (description, cost, meeting times, contact info) as DDs.
Other CSS users may prefer to use unordered lists or the like, and
sometimes I do, too.
Is my use of DL appropriate? According to [Russ Weakley]:
> There are two points of view about the use of definition lists. Some
> people believe that definition lists should only be used for terms
> and definitions. Others believe that definition lists can be used to
> tie together any items that have a direct relationship with each
> other (name/value sets). This second point of view is supported by
> an example within the W3C specifications:
>> Another application of DL, for example, is for marking up
>> dialogues, with each DT naming a speaker, and each DD containing