[rfc-i] <list> brainstorming

Julian Reschke julian.reschke at gmx.de
Wed Jan 29 06:45:43 PST 2014


On 2014-01-28 20:29, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> On 29/01/2014 05:46, Nico Williams wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 10:36 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke at gmx.de> wrote:
>>> Yup. Hopefully we can come up with something that solves most of the
>>> problems without causing too much breakage.
>>
>> To start:
>>
>>   - allow <list> outside <t>
>>   - introduce a new element for list elements (<lt>, <li>, whatever)
>> and distinguish sub-parts of list elements (<dt> and <dd> like
>> elements)
>>   - add a list label element
>>   - obviously allow <t> inside list elements (but not definition lists
>> definition elements)
>>   - allow <t> within <t> (indent) or add a new element for that (and
>> maybe also distinguish from blockquote by adding a blockquote element)
>>
>> That should cover all or almost all of your points.
>
> Just making it work like plain HTML or LaTeX lists would be a great
> improvement.

Just stealing HTML elements is of course tempting; however, I'm a bit 
concerned that unless do it all the way it might cause unnecessary 
confusion.

One potential approach is to borrow the design (ul/ol/dl distinction) 
and apply it to the syntax we have:

<list style="ordered|unordered|definition">

(...and keep the old styles for backwards compat).

Furthermore, we'd need a new place to stick in what HTML has in CSS 
(such as selecting the symbol/number format...).

> Dare I ask for a directive like <?rfc oldlist="yes"?> for
> processing legacy documents?
> ...

No more PIs, please. I believe we can extend this without breaking things.

Best regards, Julian


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list