← Back to context

Comment by Demiurge

1 day ago

I love DL. I think tables, at least in the past, were misused as DLs even more in the past and the inconvenience of the table markup is even worse than a bunch of divs.

19 comments

Demiurge

Reply
enriquto  1 day ago

It's not that inconvenient if you omit unnecessary closing tags:

    <tr>
    <td> first
    <td> second
    <tr>
    <td> what
    <td> ever

I find it simpler and cleaner than any of the markdown table markups

  • sedatk  1 day ago

    > if you omit unnecessary closing tags

    As someone who had written lots of XHTML in the past, not having closing tags makes my eyes twitch like Scrat in Ice Age. I even occasionally write `<br>` like `<br/>` out of habit.

    • rebane2001  6 hours ago

      You cannot close HTML tags that way anyways, <br> and <br/> are the same, as are <div> and <div/>. The spec defines whether an element self-closes, the slash is just ignored.

    • troad  17 hours ago

      > <br/>

      Only occasionally? I will die on this hill.

      Yes yes, someone is about to tell me that Opera running on a PS Vita with the language set to Basque will display those incorrectly. That ISO 714-4BΔ-鸡冠 defines them as undefined, and prohibits them within eight clock ticks of C sequence points. That Apple charges an extra 1% app store commission for them (except where prohibited by court injunction).

      Call it a concession to my sanity. A song of saner days.

      3 replies →

  • myfonj  1 day ago

    Fair point, though /DT and /DD are also optional just like /TH, /TD and /TR are. So in effect, def…scription list could structurally save you one TR for each entry and two "BLE"s:

        <table><tr><th>Term 1<td>Definition 1
           <tr><th>Term 2<td>Definition 2
    </table>
    <dl><dt>Term 1<dd>Definition 1
        <dt>Term 2<dd>Definition 2
    </dl>