Forrest wrote:[color=blue]
> RobG wrote:
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>>>> It fails, but I think he's keeping the format for philosophical
>>>> reasons.[/color][/color]
>
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>>> Philosophical reasons?[/color][/color]
>
>[color=green]
>> Probably the philosophy that users will be impressed to see different
>> representations of the page depending on how their UA decides to
>> untangle the mess.[/color]
>
>
> Apparently putting the anchor outside the list item is the only way to
> get the list item icon (bullet, etc.) to be clickable.[/color]
Thank you for explaining the intention of the markup - I didn't
realise that was the reason.
[color=blue]
>
> When the validator calls doing so an error, it's a flaw in the validator[/color]
Not at all. The validator's job is to rigidly test against a DTD and
report the results, nothing more.
[color=blue]
> and, simultaneously, a well-known, tacitly acknowledged oversight in the
> specification.[/color]
Now that may be closer to the point - that you'd like the bullet
symbol included in the link. I guess UI specialists can argue the
pros and cons of that one long and hard. I'll just point out that a
label element can be used to make the label of a radio or checkbox
'clickable', but rarely is it employed (in my limited experience of
course).
[color=blue]
>
> Also, browsers that don't render the code as intended are the problem:[/color]
The only means of communication you have with a browser is source code
(ignoring scripting), the languages you have are HTML & CSS, so you
must convey your intentions via those media. If they are lacking,
then that is a problem with either the languages or your ability to
use them, not the browser.
I don't think you can deride a browser that shows invalid markup
differently to how some other browser may wish to show it - you can
only observe that they chose to do different things with it.
[color=blue]
> by so failing they are unforgivably, dangerously, hacker-exploitably
> flawed.[/color]
I can't see how not displaying invalid markup makes a browser
'dangerously, hacker-exploitably flawed'. Where's the exploit?
[color=blue]
> Which is why (I guess) one shouldn't use an unsymboled list
> style and put the bullets in the list items by hand.[/color]
I would think the only issue with hand-coded bullets is code bloat -
but that shouldn't be too much of an issue if a symbol is used rather
than an image of the symbol.
<ul>
<li><a href="#">• apple
<li><a href="#">• pear
<li><a href="#">• orange
</ul>
There is an excellent resource at:
<URL:http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/chars.html>
--
Rob
the canonical structure of links in lists? 
