Problems Starting an Ordered List at Zero

**Neal** · Jul 23 '05, 10:12 PM

Re: Problems Starting an Ordered List at Zero

On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 13:33:12 -0400, Jim Cobban <jcobban@magma. ca> wrote:
[color=blue]
> I cannot get Netscape 4.79 to properly display the ordered list in the
> following fragment.[/color]

That browser is antique. If it will not observe the start attribute, and
you must accommodate NN4, you'll ned to number manually.
[color=blue]
> When I go to the W3C website I am informed that the start= attribute is
> "DEPRECATED ". However I cannot find any alternative way to achieve this
> result that is not deprecated.[/color]

Deprecated markup is allowed in the Transitional DTD. But as you seem to
need to work with a browser that can't handle it anyway, you might need to
do it differently anyhow.

**Jim Cobban** · Jul 23 '05, 10:12 PM

Re: Problems Starting an Ordered List at Zero

"Neal" <neal413@yahoo. com> wrote in message
news:opseu81fly 6v6656@news.ind ividual.net...[color=blue]
> On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 13:33:12 -0400, Jim Cobban <jcobban@magma. ca> wrote:
>[color=green]
> > I cannot get Netscape 4.79 to properly display the ordered list in the
> > following fragment.[/color]
>
> That browser is antique. If it will not observe the start attribute, and
> you must accommodate NN4, you'll ned to number manually.[/color]

I appreciate that 4.79 is antique, however several of the web sites that I
deal with use a tool, MrSid, that does not support any more recent Mozilla
based browser. That is the tool refuses to install itself into the newer
browsers.

**Dave Patton** · Jul 23 '05, 10:12 PM

Re: Problems Starting an Ordered List at Zero

"Jim Cobban" <jcobban@magma. ca> wrote in
news:0YednRmpha 8FncjcRVn-uQ@magma.ca:
[color=blue]
> I appreciate that 4.79 is antique, however several of the web sites
> that I deal with use a tool, MrSid, that does not support any more
> recent Mozilla based browser. That is the tool refuses to install
> itself into the newer browsers.[/color]

LizardTech's MrSid isn't a tool, but a compression method.
If you are using websites that have images that are in
MrSid format, there are a number of ways to deal with such
images, including using a browser plugin, which will work
with more modern browsers than Netscape 4.79 - do a google
search and you'll find info about people getting the plugin
to work in various browser versions, or you could ask in
a browser-specific newsgroup.

--
Dave Patton
Canadian Coordinator, Degree Confluence Project

the Degree Confluence Project

http://www.confluence.org/

The Degree Confluence Project contains photographs of the intersections of integer latitude and longitude degree lines.

My website: http://members.shaw.ca/davepatton/

**Jukka K. Korpela** · Jul 23 '05, 10:12 PM

Re: Problems Starting an Ordered List at Zero

Neal <neal413@yahoo. com> wrote:
[color=blue][color=green]
>> I cannot get Netscape 4.79 to properly display the ordered list in
>> the following fragment.[/color]
>
> That browser is antique. If it will not observe the start attribute,[/color]

It observes the start attribute but does not support a value of "0".
There are some odd deficiencies in browser support to this attribute
(e.g., when you use "0", or negative numbers, or large numbers).
[color=blue]
> and you must accommodate NN4, you'll ned to number manually.[/color]

Indeed, because there's no CSS equivalent to the start attribute.

When the numbers are _essential_, it's probably best to make them part of
the content. The best approach is usually to use a <ul> element, with a
class attribute, say <ul class="numbered ">, with numbers in the <li>
elements (<li>0. foo bar</li>) and with a CSS rule like
ul.numbered { list-style-type: none; }

--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Pages about Web authoring: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/www.html

**Jim Cobban** · Jul 23 '05, 10:12 PM

Re: Problems Starting an Ordered List at Zero

"Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tu t.fi> wrote in message
news:Xns956FDE4 7BF13Djkorpelac stutfi@193.229. 0.31...[color=blue]
> Neal <neal413@yahoo. com> wrote:
>
> When the numbers are _essential_, it's probably best to make them part of
> the content. The best approach is usually to use a <ul> element, with a
> class attribute, say <ul class="numbered ">, with numbers in the <li>
> elements (<li>0. foo bar</li>) and with a CSS rule like
> ul.numbered { list-style-type: none; }[/color]

If the text of the list item is too long to fit on one line won't it wrap
back to the left margin, rather than being indented to the same horizontal
position as the first letter of the text on the first line?

**Jukka K. Korpela** · Jul 23 '05, 10:12 PM

Re: Problems Starting an Ordered List at Zero

"Jim Cobban" <jcobban@magma. ca> wrote:
[color=blue][color=green]
>> When the numbers are _essential_, it's probably best to make them
>> part of the content. The best approach is usually to use a <ul>
>> element, with a class attribute, say <ul class="numbered ">, with
>> numbers in the <li> elements (<li>0. foo bar</li>) and with a CSS
>> rule like ul.numbered { list-style-type: none; }[/color]
>
> If the text of the list item is too long to fit on one line won't it
> wrap back to the left margin, rather than being indented to the same
> horizontal position as the first letter of the text on the first
> line?[/color]

Typically, yes. I didn't want to go into the presentational details, but
if you wish to simulate the typical appearance of <ol>, you need to add
some CSS code and probably extra HTML markup (for the numbers) too.
On the other hand, it gets a bit awkward then, so you might also consider
using a table:

<table class="numbered " summary=
"This table corresponds to a numbered list, so that the first
column has item numbers, the second column contains the items."
cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" >
<tr><td align="right" valign="top">0.    </td>
<td>foo bar</td></tr>
....
</table>

It's a bit clumsy too, of course, and a bit illogical, since the cells of
the first column should really be headers for the cells of the second
column (<th scope="row">0.</th>). But I just sketched an approach that
works in "pure" (though surely not Puristic) HTML. Of course you could
also use table markup with no presentational attributes (and no  
trickery) and handle the rendering in CSS, though then the list would
look a bit odd in CSS-disabled browsing.

--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Pages about Web authoring: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/www.html

**Toby Inkster** · Jul 23 '05, 10:12 PM

Re: Problems Starting an Ordered List at Zero

Jukka K. Korpela wrote:[color=blue]
> When the numbers are _essential_, it's probably best to make them part of
> the content. The best approach is usually to use a <ul> element, with a
> class attribute, say <ul class="numbered ">, with numbers in the <li>
> elements (<li>0. foo bar</li>) and with a CSS rule like
> ul.numbered { list-style-type: none; }[/color]

Seems nasty though to suggest the use of a <ul> element in a situation
where the numbers (and thus presumably the ordering) are so important.

I guess this would end up producing the correct result in the most
situations though.

--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact
Now Playing ~ ./white_town_-_your_woman.ogg

**Stan Brown** · Jul 23 '05, 10:12 PM

Re: Problems Starting an Ordered List at Zero

"Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tu t.fi> wrote in
comp.infosystem s.www.authoring.html:[color=blue]
>Indeed, because there's no CSS equivalent to the start attribute.[/color]

I wonder why, given that the attribute is deprecated in HTML 4.01
Strict.

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA

http://OakRoadSystems.com/

HTML 4.01 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/
validator: http://validator.w3.org/
CSS 2.1 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/
validator: http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/

**Jim Cobban** · Jul 23 '05, 10:12 PM

Re: Problems Starting an Ordered List at Zero

"Stan Brown" <the_stan_brown @fastmail.fm> wrote in message
news:MPG.1bc0b8 34d287037598ca2 d@news.odyssey. net...[color=blue]
> "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tu t.fi> wrote in
> comp.infosystem s.www.authoring.html:[color=green]
> >Indeed, because there's no CSS equivalent to the start attribute.[/color]
>
> I wonder why, given that the attribute is deprecated in HTML 4.01
> Strict.[/color]

Apparently you are supposed to write some complicated CSS code to implement
the counter yourself. Seems overkill, and if they are going to propose such
a complicated workaround I feel they should describe the workaround in the
specification.

**Lauri Raittila** · Jul 23 '05, 10:13 PM

Re: Problems Starting an Ordered List at Zero

In article <IdidndWzkaSZbM vcRVn-hQ@magma.ca>, jcobban@magma.c a says...[color=blue]
>
> "Stan Brown" <the_stan_brown @fastmail.fm> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1bc0b8 34d287037598ca2 d@news.odyssey. net...[color=green]
> > "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tu t.fi> wrote in
> > comp.infosystem s.www.authoring.html:[color=darkred]
> > >Indeed, because there's no CSS equivalent to the start attribute.[/color]
> >
> > I wonder why, given that the attribute is deprecated in HTML 4.01
> > Strict.[/color][/color]

IMHO, they should have included some attribute to hide markers in HTML,
even if deprecated it at the same time.
[color=blue]
> Apparently you are supposed to write some complicated CSS code to implement
> the counter yourself.[/color]

ol {counter-reset:foo;}
li:before {content:counte r(foo) ".";display:mar ker;}
li {counter-increment:foo;}

But, IMHO, that is not that bad. I can't think any easier way to code the
same - remember, CSS is not HTML specific, so first and last rule are
needed to tell browser which are the list elements, display:marker is
needed for rendering content as list item marker (it does not workm on
any browser).

It doesn't leave much.
[color=blue]
> Seems overkill,[/color]

IMHO, Counter things in CSS2 are quite nice and easy. They have been
supported by Opera for years. The reson they are hardly ever used is that
no Other browser have implemented them.

Often, when strange numbering is needed, numbers should be content. And
just as often, numbering is stylish, but can't be done in certain
browsers exept by putting numbers in content (anything with more than one
level of numbers)

--
Lauri Raittila <http://www.iki.fi/lr> <http://www.iki.fi/zwak/fonts>

**Jukka K. Korpela** · Jul 23 '05, 10:13 PM

Re: Problems Starting an Ordered List at Zero

Toby Inkster <usenet200409@t obyinkster.co.u k> wrote:
[color=blue]
> Seems nasty though to suggest the use of a <ul> element in a situation
> where the numbers (and thus presumably the ordering) are so important.[/color]

I would say just the opposite: if the numbers are really important, then
they should be part of the textual content, and then <ul> is adequate.

The <ol> element is basically the same as <ul> but with different default
rendering. That is, their difference is presentational rather than
semantic.

--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Pages about Web authoring: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/www.html

**Jukka K. Korpela** · Jul 23 '05, 10:13 PM

Re: Problems Starting an Ordered List at Zero

Lauri Raittila <lauri@raittila .cjb.net> wrote:
[color=blue]
> ol {counter-reset:foo;}
> li:before {content:counte r(foo) ".";display:mar ker;}
> li {counter-increment:foo;}
>
> But, IMHO, that is not that bad.[/color]

Except that it does not work, and it uses CSS constructs that are being
phased out rather soon, in CSS 2.1, the strange mix of industry standard
CSS and a few new odd inventions.

It was an unnecessarily complicated thing to handle a simple thing like a
replacement for <ol start="0">.

--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Pages about Web authoring: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/www.html

**Lauri Raittila** · Jul 23 '05, 10:13 PM

Re: Problems Starting an Ordered List at Zero

In article <Xns957137A5908 Bjkorpelacstutf i@193.229.0.31> ,
jkorpela@cs.tut .fi says...[color=blue]
> Lauri Raittila <lauri@raittila .cjb.net> wrote:
>[color=green]
> > ol {counter-reset:foo;}
> > li:before {content:counte r(foo) ".";display:mar ker;}
> > li {counter-increment:foo;}
> >
> > But, IMHO, that is not that bad.[/color]
>
> Except that it does not work,[/color]

Yes. That is it's only problem. (of course, problem is not small...)
[color=blue]
> It was an unnecessarily complicated thing to handle a simple thing like a
> replacement for <ol start="0">.[/color]

But, it awould make possible to style things with numbers, unlike start
attribute. Of course, it is not good idea for replacing numbers in lists.
But IMHO, OL was bad idea from start, I would much prefer something like
this:

<list><li><mark er>0.</marker>First Item</li></list>

And marker would be optional, when leaved out style would come from
stylesheet.

--
Lauri Raittila <http://www.iki.fi/lr> <http://www.iki.fi/zwak/fonts>

**Stan Brown** · Jul 23 '05, 10:13 PM

Re: Problems Starting an Ordered List at Zero

"Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tu t.fi> wrote in
comp.infosystem s.www.authoring.html:[color=blue]
>The <ol> element is basically the same as <ul> but with different default
>rendering. That is, their difference is presentational rather than
>semantic.[/color]

Hmm, I wonder.

Never mind CSS for a minute; consider just generic documents. My
take on a bulleted list is that the items are equal and could just
as well appear in any order; my take on a numbered list is that theh
numbers are steps in a procedure.

I agree with you that the numbers themselves re not terribly
important, but the fact that "microwave for 10 minutes" comes before
"puree with a blender" _is_ important.

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA

http://OakRoadSystems.com/

HTML 4.01 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/
validator: http://validator.w3.org/
CSS 2.1 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/
validator: http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/

Problems Starting an Ordered List at Zero

Problems Starting an Ordered List at Zero

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment