On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 6:02 AM, Keryx Web <<a href="mailto:webmaster@keryx.se">webmaster@keryx.se</a>> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Henri Sivonen skrev:<br>
<div class="Ih2E3d"><br>
> For various legacy parsing reasons and in the table case for CSS table<br>
> model reasons, this kind of thing is seriously more trouble for<br>
> implementors than it is worth. From an implementation cost/benefit point<br>
> of view, I am against allowing ins/del in more places.<br>
><br>
<br>
</div>But from what I've understood it actually works as expected today (in<br>
lists). Not that I've yet tested this exhaustively.<br>
<br>
Allowing list markup in tables seems to be a nightmare to spec and<br>
implement - and teach! Ins and del in tables is no priority of mine either.<br>
<br>
<br>
Lars Gunther<br>
</blockquote></div>Yes, if you have any insight as to why it is difficult, please share. As it is, browsers (specifically, FF2, IE7, and Opera9) seem to handle it just fine.<br><a href="http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/?%3Ctitle%3EIns%2FDel%20within%20lists%3C%2Ftitle%3E%0D%0A%3C!--%0D%0A%3Cstyle%20type%3D%22text%2Fcss%22%3E%0D%0Adel%20%7B%0D%0Adisplay%3A%20none%3B%0D%0A%7D%0D%0A%0D%0Ains%20%7B%0D%0Atext-decoration%3A%20none%3B%0D%0A%7D%0D%0A%3C%2Fstyle%3E%0D%0A--%3E%0D%0A%3Col%3E%0D%0A%09%3Cli%3EOne%3C%2Fli%3E%0D%0A%09%3Cdel%3E%3Cli%3ETwo%3C%2Fli%3E%3C%2Fdel%3E%0D%0A%09%3Cli%3EThree%3C%2Fli%3E%0D%0A%09%3Cins%3E%3Cli%3EThree.5%3C%2Fli%3E%3C%2Fins%3E%0D%0A%09%3Cli%3EFour%3C%2Fli%3E%0D%0A%3C%2Fol%3E">http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/?%3Ctitle%3EIns%2FDel%20within%20lists%3C%2Ftitle%3E%0D%0A%3C!--%0D%0A%3Cstyle%20type%3D%22text%2Fcss%22%3E%0D%0Adel%20%7B%0D%0Adisplay%3A%20none%3B%0D%0A%7D%0D%0A%0D%0Ains%20%7B%0D%0Atext-decoration%3A%20none%3B%0D%0A%7D%0D%0A%3C%2Fstyle%3E%0D%0A--%3E%0D%0A%3Col%3E%0D%0A%09%3Cli%3EOne%3C%2Fli%3E%0D%0A%09%3Cdel%3E%3Cli%3ETwo%3C%2Fli%3E%3C%2Fdel%3E%0D%0A%09%3Cli%3EThree%3C%2Fli%3E%0D%0A%09%3Cins%3E%3Cli%3EThree.5%3C%2Fli%3E%3C%2Fins%3E%0D%0A%09%3Cli%3EFour%3C%2Fli%3E%0D%0A%3C%2Fol%3E</a><br>
Note - this is obviously triggering quirks mode. FF2, in fact, refuses to style the <ins> and <del> elements if you give the page a proper DOCTYPE. The other two browsers seem to accept it just fine, though. <br>
<br>In DOM terms, both FF and Opera create a well-formed, identical tree. IE does something... weird. I don't really understand what's going on there in the DOM, mainly because I've never seen a red tagname before. However, it obviously styles things correctly. Note, though, that IE drops the tags when it displays the InnerHTML. Odd.<br>
<br>>I like the idea of a list header, maybe <lh><br>No need to add a new element. Some simple experimentation shows that all major browsers will accept a simple <h1>. That still communicates the semantics you want, without any backwards-compatibility issues.<br>
<br>
<br>>> I doubt this is something we'd ever want in HTML. CSS3 can do this<br>
>> just fine with generated content and counters, though.<br>
><br>
>And the original problem can be solved using CSS2;<br>
>I only wanted to bring a similar example:<br>
>HTML poorly supports interleaving unrelated markup streams.<br>Please, elaborate. The reason this is a problem is because it *can't* be well-solved with CSS. If the <ins>/<del> is used *within* an <li> then it breaks the numbering of <ol> when you hide the <del>'d elements. The semantics are wrong as well - it indicates that you have a list item with deleted text, not a deleted list item. The ability to wrap <ins>/<del> around <li> solves a specific semantic issue and a display issue as well.<br>
<br>On the other hand, mixing together lists and tables doesn't seem to have any good semantic interpretation. The reason I objected to that example was because you'd pretty much just be jacking the *display* of <ol> for your own purposes, without regard to the semantics. If you just want something numbered without giving it proper list semantics, hand-number it or use generated content.<br>
<br>Now, an objection I can think of is that, if <ins>/<del> around <li> is allowed, there's no good reason not to allow it around <tr> or <td> either, or even <tbody> for that matter. It would have clear, useful semantics, but would likely be a lot more complex. The following link shows that every browser parses it differently, and none of them actually pay attention to it:<br>
<a href="http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/?%3Ctitle%3EIns%2FDel%20within%20tables%3C%2Ftitle%3E%0D%0A%3C!--%0D%0A%3Cstyle%20type%3D%22text%2Fcss%22%3E%0D%0Adel%20%7B%0D%0Adisplay%3A%20none%3B%0D%0A%7D%0D%0A%0D%0Ains%20%7B%0D%0Atext-decoration%3A%20none%3B%0D%0A%7D%0D%0A%3C%2Fstyle%3E%0D%0A--%3E%0D%0A%3Ctable%3E%0D%0A%3Ctr%3E%3Cdel%3E%3Ctd%3EOne%3C%2Ftd%3E%3C%2Fdel%3E%3Cins%3E%3Ctd%3EOne.5%3C%2Ftd%3E%3C%2Fins%3E%3C%2Ftr%3E%0D%0A%3Ctr%3E%3Ctd%3ETwo%3C%2Ftd%3E%3C%2Ftr%3E%0D%0A%3Cdel%3E%3Ctr%3E%3Ctd%3EThree%3C%2Ftd%3E%3C%2Ftr%3E%3C%2Fdel%3E%0D%0A%3Cins%3E%3Ctr%3E%3Ctd%3EThree.5%3C%2Ftd%3E%3C%2Ftr%3E%3C%2Fins%3E%0D%0A%3Ctr%3E%3Ctd%3EFour%3C%2Ftd%3E%3C%2Ftr%3E%0D%0A%3C%2Ftable%3E">http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/?%3Ctitle%3EIns%2FDel%20within%20tables%3C%2Ftitle%3E%0D%0A%3C!--%0D%0A%3Cstyle%20type%3D%22text%2Fcss%22%3E%0D%0Adel%20%7B%0D%0Adisplay%3A%20none%3B%0D%0A%7D%0D%0A%0D%0Ains%20%7B%0D%0Atext-decoration%3A%20none%3B%0D%0A%7D%0D%0A%3C%2Fstyle%3E%0D%0A--%3E%0D%0A%3Ctable%3E%0D%0A%3Ctr%3E%3Cdel%3E%3Ctd%3EOne%3C%2Ftd%3E%3C%2Fdel%3E%3Cins%3E%3Ctd%3EOne.5%3C%2Ftd%3E%3C%2Fins%3E%3C%2Ftr%3E%0D%0A%3Ctr%3E%3Ctd%3ETwo%3C%2Ftd%3E%3C%2Ftr%3E%0D%0A%3Cdel%3E%3Ctr%3E%3Ctd%3EThree%3C%2Ftd%3E%3C%2Ftr%3E%3C%2Fdel%3E%0D%0A%3Cins%3E%3Ctr%3E%3Ctd%3EThree.5%3C%2Ftd%3E%3C%2Ftr%3E%3C%2Fins%3E%0D%0A%3Ctr%3E%3Ctd%3EFour%3C%2Ftd%3E%3C%2Ftr%3E%0D%0A%3C%2Ftable%3E</a><br>
<br>~TJ<br>