#460 list/@type="unordered" is not recommended, but used often

GREEN
open
Martin Holmes
9(high)
2014-08-04
2012-10-25
Martin Holmes
No

The definition of list/@type suggests these values:

ordered
list items are numbered or lettered.
bulleted
list items are marked with a bullet or other typographic device.
simple
list items are not numbered or bulleted. [Default]
gloss
each list item glosses some term or concept, which is given by a label element preceding the list item.

However, the stylesheets are peppered with uses of "unordered" (which used to be in there, but is not any more). These should be replaced with "bulleted", presumably.

Related

Bugs: #460

Discussion

1 2 3 .. 5 > >> (Page 1 of 5)
  • Martin Holmes
    Martin Holmes
    2012-10-25

    I had no intention of pre-emptively assigning this to Sebastian. Did he take it, or did I do it by accident? Either way, James or Sebastian, feel free to dump it back to me if you want.

     
  • Piotr Banski
    Piotr Banski
    2012-10-25

    The "XSLT stylesheets" category caused the automatic assignment to Sebastian, and for a reason :-)

     
  • I'd say change the guidelines. "bulleted" is a bad recommended value, in my opinion, and not a good alternate to "ordered". I also think having "simple" as the default is simply barking - how
    many lists do you see which are neither numbered nor bulleted?

    I think we have an earlier ticket from John McCaskey on this subject.

     
  • I also claim the Stylesheets have might over right. They've been supporting "unordered" not "bulleted" for over 10 years, and no-one has ever complained.....

     
  • Yes. The earlier ticket, 3548625, was rejected. The discussion there might still be helpful though.

     
  • Martin Holmes
    Martin Holmes
    2012-10-26

    This is on the list for things to think about for P6:

    http://wiki.tei-c.org/index.php/P6-dev

    But I think it's a bit backwards to say that we made a decision for P5 and implemented it, but because that implementation wasn't yet carried over to the stylesheets, we should reverse it.

     
  • The decision was not to go with John's more extensive review of how list appearances work. It did not, I think, discuss the existing arbitrary list of values? ie bulleted vs unordered.

    Looking at the Guidelines source again (I probably did this before):

    ./Source/Guidelines/en/HD-Header.xml:<list type="bullets">
    ./Source/Guidelines/en/IN-RulesForInterchange.xml:<list type="bullets">
    ./Source/Guidelines/en/IN-RulesForInterchange.xml:<list type="bullets">
    ./Source/Guidelines/en/IN-RulesForInterchange.xml:<list type="bullets">
    ./Source/Guidelines/fr/IN-RulesForInterchange.xml:<list type="bullets">
    ./Source/Guidelines/fr/IN-RulesForInterchange.xml:<list type="bullets">
    ./Source/Guidelines/fr/IN-RulesForInterchange.xml:<list type="bullets">
    ./Source/Specs/item.xml: <list type="unordered">
    ./Source/Specs/list.xml: <item>a candlestick maker, with <list type="bullets"><item>rings on his fingers</item><item>bells on his toes</item></list>
    ./Source/Specs/list.xml: <list type="unordered">
    ./Source/Specs/list.xml: <list type="bullets">

    from which I conclude that
    a) we dont use bulleted, we use bullets.
    b) we do use unordered
    c) our suggest valList is a NONSENSE

     
  • Lou Burnard
    Lou Burnard
    2012-11-04

    The suggested valList is not a NONSENSE. It is based on the observation that every doc preparation system known to man (or woman) offers a choice between labelling list items with a sequence number, with some sort of splodge, with a variable label, or with nothing at all. It suggests some appropriate names for each of these (perhaps "numbered" or "sequenced" would be better than "ordered" since lists are by definition ordered, but then people will say that "a, b, c, d" are not numbering)

    You could more plausibly argue that both practice in the encoding of the Guidelines and facilities offered by the Stylesheet libraries are NONSENSE, since they don't follow the suggested names. But that is hardly their fault, since the names were only settled on recently.

    We can, and I think should, make practice in the Guidelines consistent with the proposed valList, modulo any suggested change in it; we should also make sure the Stylesheets support that recommended set of values. At what stage the Stylesheets stop supporting other possible values is up to their maintainer...

     
  • well, yes, I meant the combination of the practice of the Guidelines and the <valList> together makes a nonsense. We should change one or the other. I would say we should recommended and use "ordered", "unordered" and "gloss" and (even more importantly) decide what on earth we mean by "simple". Where are these lists which have no number or symbol of any kind attached to an item? is that really the default situation?

    I would avoid both "bullet" and "number" in the names, as this implies something about rendition. As you say, "a", "b", "c" are not numbers, and (eg) pointing hands or dashes are not bullets.

    obviously having the XSLT support the values in the <valList> is the easiest bit.

     
    • milestone: --> RED
     
1 2 3 .. 5 > >> (Page 1 of 5)