E-mail List Archives
Re: DL inside UL navigation
From: ben morrison
Date: Aug 1, 2005 10:06AM
- Next message: Graham Cook: "RE: position description"
- Previous message: Patrick Lauke: "RE: DL inside UL navigation"
- Next message in Thread: Jukka K. Korpela: "Re: DL inside UL navigation"
- Previous message in Thread: Patrick Lauke: "RE: DL inside UL navigation"
- View all messages in this Thread
On 8/1/05, Patrick Lauke < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
> > How else could i associate SADC, COMESA etc to belong to AFRICA.
>
> How are you associating AFRICA to belong to Trade Policy Issues, and those
> Trade Policy Issues to The project?
I presumed that AFRICA belonged to Trade Policy Issues because it was
nested inside of the <li>.
Is it better to keep to one set of lists instead of changing to a DL
inside a UL?
> To follow your rationale through, you should really mark the whole thing up as nested
> definition lists
Ive never used a DL for navigation before so as long as there are no
drawbacks to this approach that would make sense.
thanks, ben
- Next message: Graham Cook: "RE: position description"
- Previous message: Patrick Lauke: "RE: DL inside UL navigation"
- Next message in Thread: Jukka K. Korpela: "Re: DL inside UL navigation"
- Previous message in Thread: Patrick Lauke: "RE: DL inside UL navigation"
- View all messages in this Thread