Comments on: Should comments be coded as definition lists?

By: mik

mik — Sun, 29 Oct 2006 10:41:01 +0000

I think we should look at this using a common sense approach.

Definition Lists (dl) is by it’s name a list of definitions. Within this list of definitions are the terms (dt) and the descriptions (dd) of those terms. Therefore, to show comments using the definition list is semantically inaccurate. It may look pretty when the styles are taken out of the equation, but the purpose of HTML (or XHTML) is to display the data in semantically correct form. Remember, CSS is used to style the data presentation.

So, what are comments? They are conversational pieces of text relating to the subject and relating subjects at the matter. They are displayed in an ORDERLY fashion, as conversations do not exist without some sort of order. Most comments are by default set to OLDEST > LATEST, and therefore should be considered as an ordered list (ol). Remember that comments have authors, which should be cited (cite) properly. This includes blockquotes.

Semantically speaking, you should use the ordered list to represent your comments, however some designs may be too complicated to show this. Therefore we have two options.

Firstly, we can use divisions (div) which is probably the better option if you want to stick to your design. Using divs is a standards compliant method of structuring the data, it may not be entirely semantically accurate, but it is a close method which is employed by thousands of designers/developers.

The other option of course is to redesign, or to develop a design that is simplistic yet creative. I find that the simpler designs with less clutter are much more appealing and potentially prove to be more usable and accessible – not to mention screen reader friendly.

Anyway, interesting debate starter, and very interesting site, well done.

By: Rachel

Rachel — Sun, 05 Mar 2006 21:45:53 +0000

Thanks Stephan, I’m changing things around quite a bit here…should be working ok now.

By: Stephan L.

Stephan L. — Sat, 04 Mar 2006 20:01:10 +0000

Nice structure Rachel.
But i have a liitle problem with the header menu.(its hover image)

By: John Hamman

John Hamman — Fri, 03 Mar 2006 18:00:57 +0000

I dont think it should for those who want to keep Definition List in there proper use. I think Wired Magazine stretches it’s use on its website to list articles, or at least thats how it was a while ago. Your strick followers of w3c will probably say this is against its proper use, in the same way they would say using a table for non data aesthetic things is wrong.

By: michael

michael — Fri, 03 Mar 2006 06:27:36 +0000

I’m not quite following this, your example has the

Author
Comment

but there are the other fields in most comment forms like mail and website. Are those terms or definitions? I don’t think either. So, using a definition list excludes important information. You could certainly strip that in the back end, only outputting your list, but why?

You might make some new microformat in XML but I don’t think a dl is the answer here.

By: sosa

sosa — Fri, 03 Mar 2006 03:46:41 +0000

besides, DL’s are so freakin hard to stylize properly, because each definition is formed by two diferent elements with no wrapping parent, which I think is broken. DL’s should be like this for working properly:

Term

definition

Personally I opt for my own personal microformat.

By: derek

derek — Fri, 03 Mar 2006 03:21:57 +0000

interesting that you posted about this. i just finished reading through andy budd’s css mastery and noticed the very brief paragraph stating that dl’s and dt’s can often be misused.

nonetheless, i’m going to try them out for wordpress comments.