how can I obtain parentheses in an ordered list?

[Pierre Trochu]

Hello,
how can I obtain parentheses in an ordered list?
for example,
<ol>
<li>item one</li>
<li>item two</li>
</ol>
gives
1. item one
2. item two
but I would like to obtain this:
1) item one
2) item two
Tkanks to everybody for your concern...
Pierre

 

[Jukka K. Korpela]

Scripsit Pierre Trochu:

how can I obtain parentheses in an ordered list?

You cannot.

but I would like to obtain this:
1) item one
2) item two

The best workaround is to put the numbers into the item contents and to use
<ul> without bullets. (<ul> is illogical, but using <ol> you would take the
risk that when CSS is off, the user sees both the browser-generated numbers
and your numbers.)

Use

<ul style="list-style-type: none">
<li>1)item one</li>
<li>2)item two</li>
</ul>

 

[dorayme]

The best workaround is to put the numbers into the item contents and to use
<ul> without bullets.

Indeed, it looks a reasonable solution.

(<ul> is illogical,...

Whether it is quite illogical or not depends on the details of
how to interpret the notion of ol and ul. How to interpret the
use of it in any particular context. I say it is not a simple
matter.

Presumably the ideal of an ordered list is one where the order
matters greatly as in an algorithm.

Presumably an unordered list is one where the order does not
matter greatly in terms of the meaning as in a shopping list
given to the husband by a wife who expects it to be completely
implemented without any excuses!

But these are ideals that do not quite fit many real life
situations.

The team for today is... All boys must ensure the correct
numbered football shirt....

might be ordered by shirt number or surname or not at all. In
fact, there is a choice and the ultimate usefulness of the
information is independent of the ordering or non ordering. Each
boy must see the number for himself and get the right shirt. It
may assist the boys to order the list. How far this assistance
has a semantic import seems to me not to be like the case of the
algorithm or the ordering of a DNA sequence or other things where
order is crucial.

In an unordered list, no item has to be where it is, if it were
elsewhere, no one would misunderstand anything.

But unordered lists are inescapably ordered in time or position,
there is a first... and last item. It could be different and it
might not matter, but there is some de facto ordering by the list
maker. The purpose of an ordered list might be to give a handle
to readers who wish to refer to one item conveniently. In a way
it does not matter what order is given as long as some order is
and for a purpose other than to give meaning. This could well be
accomplished by an unordered list with markers inside the list
item, numbers or whatever.

I will stop babbling now, but I don't think your suggestion is so
clearly illogical. We would need to know more about the context
in which the OP is using it. I was a little dismayed that you
left out your usual good advice about the importance of
supplying a url.

 

[Ed Mullen]

Indeed, it looks a reasonable solution.


Whether it is quite illogical or not depends on the details of
how to interpret the notion of ol and ul. How to interpret the
use of it in any particular context. I say it is not a simple
matter.

Presumably the ideal of an ordered list is one where the order
matters greatly as in an algorithm.

Presumably an unordered list is one where the order does not
matter greatly in terms of the meaning as in a shopping list
given to the husband by a wife who expects it to be completely
implemented without any excuses!

But these are ideals that do not quite fit many real life
situations.

The team for today is... All boys must ensure the correct
numbered football shirt....

might be ordered by shirt number or surname or not at all. In
fact, there is a choice and the ultimate usefulness of the
information is independent of the ordering or non ordering. Each
boy must see the number for himself and get the right shirt. It
may assist the boys to order the list. How far this assistance
has a semantic import seems to me not to be like the case of the
algorithm or the ordering of a DNA sequence or other things where
order is crucial.

In an unordered list, no item has to be where it is, if it were
elsewhere, no one would misunderstand anything.

But unordered lists are inescapably ordered in time or position,
there is a first... and last item. It could be different and it
might not matter, but there is some de facto ordering by the list
maker. The purpose of an ordered list might be to give a handle
to readers who wish to refer to one item conveniently. In a way
it does not matter what order is given as long as some order is
and for a purpose other than to give meaning. This could well be
accomplished by an unordered list with markers inside the list
item, numbers or whatever.

I will stop babbling now, but I don't think your suggestion is so
clearly illogical. We would need to know more about the context
in which the OP is using it. I was a little dismayed that you
left out your usual good advice about the importance of
supplying a url.

Fascinating, and hardly babbling. Frankly, I've never understood the
concepts of HTML "ordered" and "unordered" lists. Who the heck thought
that up? I think the presumptions you cited are silly, although the
logic is impeccable considering the standard.

I prefer to think of them as "numbered" and "un-numbered." In business
communications, certainly, part of the success of a presentation is the
content and part is the appearance. Order is important whether the list
is numbered or not. I most definitely DO care how each point flows into
the next regardless of annotation style. I prefer bullets rather than
numbers as a presentation style in most cases (and most business
presentations are done that way), unless there is a need later in a
document to refer upwards as in: "Referring to number 6 above ..."

And, BTW, I've just added "dorayme" to my SeaMonkey dictionary as the
spell checker keeps suggesting that I change it to "deodorant." I just
couldn't stand the indignity anymore. I will say that one of the other
options in the list was "adorable." That's not bad! ;-)

--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net
http://mozilla.edmullen.net
http://abington.edmullen.net
A clear conscience is usually the sign of a bad memory.

 

[dorayme]

.....

Fascinating, and hardly babbling. Frankly, I've never understood the
concepts of HTML "ordered" and "unordered" lists. Who the heck thought
that up? I think the presumptions you cited are silly, although the
logic is impeccable considering the standard.

Not quite understanding you re the presumptions?

I prefer to think of them as "numbered" and "un-numbered." In business
communications, certainly, part of the success of a presentation is the
content and part is the appearance. Order is important whether the list
is numbered or not. I most definitely DO care how each point flows into
the next regardless of annotation style. I prefer bullets rather than
numbers as a presentation style in most cases (and most business
presentations are done that way), unless there is a need later in a
document to refer upwards as in: "Referring to number 6 above ..."

Part of the idea of the distinction in the html is not to do with
style, imagine css turned off or even better, no list markers to
show. There would then, in the clearest and best uses of either,
be a distinction being conveyed about order (see my previous
examples of extremes, the algorithm versus the shopping list
under simple and realistic assumptions)

And, BTW, I've just added "dorayme" to my SeaMonkey dictionary as the
spell checker keeps suggesting that I change it to "deodorant." I just
couldn't stand the indignity anymore. I will say that one of the other
options in the list was "adorable." That's not bad! ;-)

Blush! I have occasionally wondered about befriending a sea
monkey (as a last resort, if all else were to fail). Now I know
it will not rebuff me straight away...

 

[Ed Mullen]

Not quite understanding you re the presumptions?

Your presumptions make sense. I disagree with the standard that makes
the presumptions logical. Meaning, if it's called an "ordered list,"
sure, it's logical to presume that the order is important. And
vice-versa. I just think the idea of an unordered list is kinda silly.
I can't think of any meaningful communication (even a grocery store
list) that shouldn't be in some useful order. Doesn't need to be
numbered but the meat should be grouped together, the dairy, the frozen
food, the soft drinks, cleaning supplies, etc. Otherwise I'm either
constantly walking back and forth across the store or I'm constantly
stopping to read through the list to figure out: "Hmm. Do I need to go
up this aisle? And how many things do I need in this aisle?" And, yes,
I DO order my shopping list. ;-)

Part of the idea of the distinction in the html is not to do with
style, imagine css turned off or even better, no list markers to
show. There would then, in the clearest and best uses of either,
be a distinction being conveyed about order (see my previous
examples of extremes, the algorithm versus the shopping list
under simple and realistic assumptions)

My turn to not be sure. A list of numbered items is, to me, no more or
less ordered than a list with (or without) bullets. I read left to
right, top to bottom. I assume the writer meant to put the items in the
order in which they appear. Numbers or bullets are, to me, a nicety of
visual style. Although, a numbered list does visually convey a more
rigidly disciplined approach.

Blush! I have occasionally wondered about befriending a sea
monkey (as a last resort, if all else were to fail). Now I know
it will not rebuff me straight away...

Always a nice notion, to have a fallback position!

--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net
http://mozilla.edmullen.net
http://abington.edmullen.net
I just got a physical and asked the doctor, "How do I stand?" He said,
"That's what puzzles me!"

 

[dorayme]

Your presumptions make sense. I disagree with the standard that makes
the presumptions logical. Meaning, if it's called an "ordered list,"
sure, it's logical to presume that the order is important. And
vice-versa. I just think the idea of an unordered list is kinda silly.
I can't think of any meaningful communication (even a grocery store
list) that shouldn't be in some useful order. Doesn't need to be
numbered but the meat should be grouped together, the dairy, the frozen
food, the soft drinks, cleaning supplies, etc. Otherwise I'm either
constantly walking back and forth across the store or I'm constantly
stopping to read through the list to figure out: "Hmm. Do I need to go
up this aisle? And how many things do I need in this aisle?" And, yes,
I DO order my shopping list. ;-)

Well, what you are doing, if I may say, is concentrating on the
cases that make it hard to know. This does not make the clear
cases disappear. Simply imagine a clearer case, your wife gives
you a list of things to get from the dairy section. Or a
particular shelf even!

But I agree that real life ordering is a complicated business.

 

[Ed Mullen]

Well, what you are doing, if I may say, is concentrating on the
cases that make it hard to know. This does not make the clear
cases disappear. Simply imagine a clearer case, your wife gives
you a list of things to get from the dairy section. Or a
particular shelf even!

Are you saying that order, in this example, makes no difference?
Because, well, <sigh> I do all the shopping and I do actually order my
lists that way: In the dairy section it's: butter, milk, eggs.
Because that's the way the store's laid out. Meat products?
Lunch-meats, chicken, pork, beef. Oh, ok, when it comes to produce I
don't care because I like to browse. But a grocery list isn't really
communication the way a Web page or Powerpoint presentation is. But,
hey, at least I don't use bullets or numbers on my grocery list!

But I agree that real life ordering is a complicated business.

Yep, messy business this life stuff.

--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net
http://mozilla.edmullen.net
http://abington.edmullen.net
What's another word for synonym?

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

Ed Mullen <[email protected]> wrote:

Blush! I have occasionally wondered about befriending a sea
monkey (as a last resort, if all else were to fail). Now I know
it will not rebuff me straight away...

Well I did that long ago for that I'd make an embarrassing "correction"
in my posts, I make enough already! Just wish ver 1.1 didn't trash the
Mnenhy extension.

 

[dorayme]

Well, what you are doing, if I may say, is concentrating on the
cases that make it hard to know. This does not make the clear
cases disappear. Simply imagine a clearer case, your wife gives
you a list of things to get from the dairy section. Or a
particular shelf even!

Are you saying that order, in this example, makes no difference?[/QUOTE]

What am saying is that if you were to make a shopping list which
you would access on your handheld to remind yourself in the store
and the list was of items on one small shelf, the order of the
items might well not matter. If the order mattered to you, you
might use an ordered list even in this case (to indicate to get
the lower order numbered items first in case you run out of money.

There is no denying the sense of the distinction, but it is an
interesting question (when not flirting with sea monkeys, say)
how it fits in real life cases.

 

[Ed Mullen]

Are you saying that order, in this example, makes no difference?

What am saying is that if you were to make a shopping list which
you would access on your handheld to remind yourself in the store
and the list was of items on one small shelf, the order of the
items might well not matter. [/QUOTE]

Ah! Ok, agreed. If I, say, needed 75 watt and 100 watt light bulbs, no
matter what order they are in. Indeed.

If the order mattered to you, you
might use an ordered list even in this case (to indicate to get
the lower order numbered items first in case you run out of money.

Again, indeed. And I would NOT care if the list items were numbered or
not (I do know how to read from top to bottom and understand the
intrinsic implication of that top-down order). Um, but, my point is
that in this HTML standards thingie we are grappling with, a <ul> is not
numbered and a <ol> is and the nomenclature chosen for them is silly.
The lists are both in order and the order matters in virtually all
cases. It should have been <nl> for numbered list and <bl> for bulleted
list. And, maybe, <pl> for plain list?

I suppose the upshot is that, while it's been an enjoyable and
fascinating discussion, I'm going to use the damned things as I see fit
no matter what they are called, pedants not-with-standing (and I'm not
directing that at you!). The meaning comes first, then we'll figure out
how to print the damned books (Web pages, etc.). Because you're dead on
with your comments about real life application.

There is no denying the sense of the distinction, but it is an
interesting question (when not flirting with sea monkeys, say)
how it fits in real life cases.

Exactly, and a wonderful point. Well, about the lists. Yes, and also
about real life versus what an engineer's mental process may have been
during the design phase of this. Well, hell, ok, about the sea monkeys too!

And now I must go replenish my libation. That is, very much, first (and
next) on my list. Un-numbered of course.

--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net
http://mozilla.edmullen.net
http://abington.edmullen.net
All I ask is a chance to prove that money can't make me happy.

 

[Ed Mullen]

Well I did that long ago for that I'd make an embarrassing "correction"
in my posts, I make enough already! Just wish ver 1.1 didn't trash the
Mnenhy extension.

Not sure about that one but have you tried to hack the extension and
change the version number limitation? Or is it a real incompatibility?

--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net
http://mozilla.edmullen.net
http://abington.edmullen.net
Try not to let your mind wander. it's too small and fragile to be out by
itself.

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

Jonathan N. Little wrote:

Not sure about that one but have you tried to hack the extension and
change the version number limitation? Or is it a real incompatibility?

Naw! A real incompatibility. Mnenhy gives add functionality to
mail|newgroups of which is extended headers functions, like X-Face and
clickable reference links and more. With 1.1 you lose the header display
entirely, almost like it is stuck in 'brief' header mode. Bug has been
filed with author. Hope he will get it fixed soon.

 

[Toby A Inkster]

In the dairy section it's: butter, milk, eggs.

Cows lay eggs now?

--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact
Geek of ~ HTML/CSS/Javascript/SQL/Perl/PHP/Python*/Apache/Linux

* = I'm getting there!

 

[Toby A Inkster]

Ah! Ok, agreed. If I, say, needed 75 watt and 100 watt light bulbs, no
matter what order they are in. Indeed.

Personally, I'd order them numerically by power usage.

--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact
Geek of ~ HTML/CSS/Javascript/SQL/Perl/PHP/Python*/Apache/Linux

* = I'm getting there!

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

Cows lay eggs now?

Always been a mystery of the Supermarket!

 

[Blinky the Shark]

Always been a mystery of the Supermarket!

That's always puzzled me, too.

But I just figured it out, finally! "Dairy" is grocery store short for
"Things That Come Out Of Animals Department But Not Pieces Of The Animal
Itself". It allows smaller signs.

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

That's always puzzled me, too.

But I just figured it out, finally! "Dairy" is grocery store short for
"Things That Come Out Of Animals Department But Not Pieces Of The Animal
Itself". It allows smaller signs.

Sometimes the stuff looks like "compost" in the grocery store, but I
hope not to find it in the Dairy section!

 

[dorayme]

Um, but, my point is
that in this HTML standards thingie we are grappling with, a <ul> is not
numbered and a <ol> is and the nomenclature chosen for them is silly.
The lists are both in order and the order matters in virtually all
cases.

In a short shopping list, it often does not matter. Nor in a list
of links (how many of us have wondered, what does it matter which
order we put them in regarding any semantic message to the
reader).

But such cavalierity could cause disaster in an algorithm.

About numbering, that is quite optional in <ol>s, I am not sure
what it is you are objecting to.

It is true, of course, that <ul>s have a de facto order. But if
you are really finding that you are using such an order to convey
information (as, for example, in giving an algorithm - possibly
similar to the case that started this thread) then this needs to
be made clear in some way if it is not simply obvious from
context. By the use of number ordering, for instance. By some
words to the effect of like "Do these in order". It seems to me,
to come back and add to my original point, it is not so illogical
to use ul if you also otherwise make clear an order. The idea of
<ol>, as far as I can see is to make it context independent. In
fact, I suspect people sometimes use <ol> in the html when it
does not matter what the order is but they wish to give the items
a handle for referral purposes later. Frankly, I think this part
of html could be simplified but I won't go on...

 

[Blinky the Shark]

Sometimes the stuff looks like "compost" in the grocery store, but I
hope not to find it in the Dairy section!

Well, luckily it's not "Everything That Comes Out Of Animals But Not
Pieces Of The Animal Itself".