A Choice for Unordered Lists

Discussion in 'HTML' started by sorry.no.email@post_NG.com, May 5, 2006.

  1. Hi,

    I have several short lists (about 10 to 20 lines each) that at the
    moment are simply set up with <br /> tags.

    Are there any advantages to changing these to unordered lists by
    adding something like this to my CSS and applying a class:

    .ul-nobullets {
    list-style-type: none;
    padding: 0;
    margin: 0;

    }

    Certainly it appears more elegant with CSS and I suspect reflects
    more accurately the nature of the list. Perhaps this is enough? Or
    does it actually make no difference?

    Thanks to all who help,

    Andrew.
     
    sorry.no.email@post_NG.com, May 5, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. On Fri, 05 May 2006 13:41:31 +0200, <sorry.no.email@post_NG.com> wrote:

    > I have several short lists (about 10 to 20 lines each) that at the
    > moment are simply set up with <br /> tags.


    Then it is not a list.

    > Are there any advantages to changing these to unordered lists


    Of course there is the advantage that all of a sudden it *is* a list then.


    > by adding something like this to my CSS and applying a class:
    >
    > .ul-nobullets {


    I would create selectors for class names that have any relevance as to
    *why* you want the content that it effects to have a different look. What
    if later on you decide to do bullets? The class name with 'nobullets' in
    it gets useles.




    --
    ______PretLetters:
    | weblog | http://www.pretletters.net/weblog/weblog.html |
    | webontwerp | http://www.pretletters.net/html/webontwerp.html |
    |zweefvliegen | http://www.pretletters.net/html/vliegen.html |
     
    Barbara de Zoete, May 5, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. On Fri, 05 May 2006 21:41:31 +1000, sorry.no.email@post_NG.com wrote:

    >Hi,
    >
    > I have several short lists (about 10 to 20 lines each) that at the
    >moment are simply set up with <br /> tags.
    >
    > Are there any advantages to changing these to unordered lists by
    >adding something like this to my CSS and applying a class:
    >
    > .ul-nobullets {
    > list-style-type: none;
    > padding: 0;
    > margin: 0;
    >
    > }
    >
    > Certainly it appears more elegant with CSS and I suspect reflects
    >more accurately the nature of the list. Perhaps this is enough? Or
    >does it actually make no difference?
    >
    > Thanks to all who help,
    >
    > Andrew.


    Oops!!

    Another few minutes stfw and I found much of my answer on:

    http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/04/16/dive-into.html

    Sorry!

    Andrew.
     
    sorry.no.email@post_NG.com, May 5, 2006
    #3
  4. On Fri, 05 May 2006 13:48:29 +0200, "Barbara de Zoete"
    <> wrote:

    >On Fri, 05 May 2006 13:41:31 +0200, <sorry.no.email@post_NG.com> wrote:
    >
    >> I have several short lists (about 10 to 20 lines each) that at the
    >> moment are simply set up with <br /> tags.

    >
    >Then it is not a list.
    >
    >> Are there any advantages to changing these to unordered lists

    >
    >Of course there is the advantage that all of a sudden it *is* a list then.
    >
    >
    >> by adding something like this to my CSS and applying a class:
    >>
    >> .ul-nobullets {

    >
    >I would create selectors for class names that have any relevance as to
    >*why* you want the content that it effects to have a different look. What
    >if later on you decide to do bullets? The class name with 'nobullets' in
    >it gets useles.


    Hi Barbara,

    Thanks for your comments which as usual are very direct and always
    useful :)

    I guess what I wanted to do was create a specific look for Birth
    Death and Marriage list data on a genealogy site, a type of list that
    is found many times across the site.

    Initially this involved no bullets or indents, hence the poor choice
    of name but I guess later will involve other changes so more
    accurately the selector should be .ul-birthdata for example.

    Have I understand your comments accurately?

    Andrew.
     
    sorry.no.email@post_NG.com, May 5, 2006
    #4
  5. sorry.no.email@post_NG.com

    Dylan Parry Guest

    Pondering the eternal question of "Hobnobs or Rich Tea?",
    sorry.no.email@post_NG.com finally proclaimed:

    > more accurately the selector should be .ul-birthdata for example.


    How about using "ul.birthdata" or just ".birthdata"? I don't think that
    hyphens are allowed in selector names anyway, or at least some browsers
    have problems with them.

    --
    Dylan Parry
    http://electricfreedom.org -- Where the Music Progressively Rocks!
     
    Dylan Parry, May 5, 2006
    #5
  6. On Fri, 5 May 2006, Dylan Parry wrote:

    > I don't think that hyphens are allowed in selector names anyway,


    You're entirely at liberty to consult the various applicable
    specifications, you know, before sharing your confusion with others.

    > or at least some browsers have problems with them.


    I suspect you're confuddling it with underscores.

    CSS/2, as originally formulated, specified that underscores were
    not allowed in identifiers. Therefore, browsers implemented according
    to the specification were *required*, by the CSS error handling
    specifications, to ignore identifiers which contained underscores.

    Far from "having problems with" underscores, browsers which treated
    them as syntax errors, and treated them in accordance with the CSS
    rules for handling errors (i.e ignoring the associated part of the
    CSS) were behaving correctly, whereas those which erroneously accepted
    them were in violation of the specification.

    Later, W3C mischievously slipped-in a substantive change to the
    specification via the "errata" - see
    http://www.w3.org/Style/css2-updates/REC-CSS2-19980512-errata.html#x3
    - but without making any change to the CSS version (2).

    It's impossible for a browser to conform to both CSS2 (as published)
    and CSS2 (errata), since they are contradictory.

    They really should have confined the CSS2 "errata" to editorial
    corrections, or resolving genuine ambiguities in the wording, and left
    any substantive change of the specification for a later version (a
    hypothetical /2.01, or something). That's past history now - but it's
    to be hoped they don't play that kind of trick again.
     
    Alan J. Flavell, May 5, 2006
    #6
  7. sorry.no.email@post_NG.com

    Neredbojias Guest

    To further the education of mankind, "Alan J. Flavell"
    <> vouchsafed:

    > Later, W3C mischievously slipped-in a substantive change


    Yep, I gotta remember that one...

    --
    Neredbojias
    Infinity has its limits.
     
    Neredbojias, May 5, 2006
    #7
  8. sorry.no.email@post_NG.com

    dorayme Guest

    In article <op.s82tq3x7l8uz2z@zoete_b>,
    "Barbara de Zoete" <> wrote:

    > On Fri, 05 May 2006 13:41:31 +0200, <sorry.no.email@post_NG.com> wrote:
    >
    > > I have several short lists (about 10 to 20 lines each) that at the
    > > moment are simply set up with <br /> tags.

    >
    > Then it is not a list.
    >


    This is too much! It is a list in ordinary terms and this is
    exactly what the OP meant. He is, as you know, asking about html
    lists (on which, I know, you do have good advice.)

    > > Are there any advantages to changing these to unordered lists

    >
    > Of course there is the advantage that all of a sudden it *is* a list then.
    >


    The advantage is actually this: if you mark up lists of things
    (there, you see, Barbara, I said something you deny is correct )
    with html lists, ie. <li>s and associated markup, you gain a
    uniform power over them. Many lists can simply be marked up as

    <ul>
    <li>Link or otherwise</li>
    <li>Link or otherwise</li>
    ....
    </ul>

    as you make up a site. It is a simple rule. You later can turn
    your mind to style these in css by way of assigning styles to
    ul's and li's or to various classes, ids that they can then be
    assigned. You can also change these styles to change the
    appearance in later revisions or updates of the site.

    > > by adding something like this to my CSS and applying a class:
    > >
    > > .ul-nobullets {

    >
    > I would create selectors for class names that have any relevance as to
    > *why* you want the content that it effects to have a different look. What
    > if later on you decide to do bullets? The class name with 'nobullets' in
    > it gets useles.


    This is quite difficult advice to follow in practice. It is just
    simply a fact that quite often website makers have no particular
    quite general reason to make a list look one way or another.
    Sometimes the content of the whole page or other elements dictate
    a choice. It is hard to generalise at the beginning.

    So go ahead and use appearance names to get going and later see
    if there is a more underlying thing that links all the lists of
    that appearance. Like that they are lists of bookmarks or places
    to visit by bus or countries that are good to walk in. At first
    you might not know, but then discover that you are tending to
    make such lists with special types of bullets. Then you can class
    the lot under a name that reflects what might be an underlying
    general pattern.

    You will find that the advice that folk here give often fails to
    take into account the difference between the finished product
    (which is used to show the site, also to what you turn when you
    update or revise the site or give it to someone else) and the
    actual process of making it. These are different things and it is
    a confusion to conflate the two.

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, May 6, 2006
    #8
  9. sorry.no.email@post_NG.com

    Andrew Guest

    On Fri, 05 May 2006 21:41:31 +1000, sorry.no.email@post_NG.com wrote:

    >Hi,
    >
    > I have several short lists (about 10 to 20 lines each) that at the
    >moment are simply set up with <br /> tags.
    >
    > Are there any advantages to changing these to unordered lists by
    >adding something like this to my CSS and applying a class:
    >
    > .ul-nobullets {
    > list-style-type: none;
    > padding: 0;
    > margin: 0;
    >
    > }
    >
    > Certainly it appears more elegant with CSS and I suspect reflects
    >more accurately the nature of the list. Perhaps this is enough? Or
    >does it actually make no difference?
    >
    > Thanks to all who help,
    >
    > Andrew.


    Hi Andrew,

    Test!

    Andrew
    --

    Andrew Strong
    http://people.aapt.net.au/~adjlstrong/
     
    Andrew, Jun 19, 2006
    #9
  10. On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 16:29:00 +1000, Andrew
    <sorry.no.email@post_NG.com> wrote:

    >On Fri, 05 May 2006 21:41:31 +1000, sorry.no.email@post_NG.com wrote:
    >
    >>Hi,
    >>
    >> I have several short lists (about 10 to 20 lines each) that at the
    >>moment are simply set up with <br /> tags.
    >>
    >> Are there any advantages to changing these to unordered lists by
    >>adding something like this to my CSS and applying a class:
    >>
    >> .ul-nobullets {
    >> list-style-type: none;
    >> padding: 0;
    >> margin: 0;
    >>
    >> }
    >>
    >> Certainly it appears more elegant with CSS and I suspect reflects
    >>more accurately the nature of the list. Perhaps this is enough? Or
    >>does it actually make no difference?
    >>
    >> Thanks to all who help,
    >>
    >> Andrew.

    >
    >Hi Andrew,
    >
    > Test!
    >
    > Andrew


    And again
    --
    Andrew Strong
    http://people.aapt.net.au/~adjlstrong/
     
    Andrew Strong, Jun 19, 2006
    #10
  11. sorry.no.email@post_NG.com

    Mark Parnell Guest

    Deciding to do something for the good of humanity, Andrew Strong
    <sorry.no.email@post_NG.com> declared in alt.html:

    >> Test!

    >
    > And again


    news://alt.test

    --
    Mark Parnell
    My Usenet is improved; yours could be too:
    http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
     
    Mark Parnell, Jun 19, 2006
    #11
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Mickey Segal
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    913
    Mickey Segal
    Feb 2, 2004
  2. Hardeep Rakhra
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    418
    Hardeep Rakhra
    Jan 12, 2004
  3. Luigi Donatello Asero

    Unordered lists of images

    Luigi Donatello Asero, May 5, 2005, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    474
    Andy Dingley
    May 7, 2005
  4. sam

    unordered lists

    sam, Dec 2, 2005, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    383
    Disco Octopus
    Dec 4, 2005
  5. Roedy Green

    ordered lists vs unordered lists

    Roedy Green, Aug 30, 2008, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    609
    dorayme
    Aug 30, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page