diff options
| author | http://jmtd.livejournal.com/ <http://jmtd.livejournal.com/@web> | 2009-07-12 17:57:19 -0400 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Joey Hess <joey@kitenet.net> | 2009-07-12 17:57:19 -0400 |
| commit | fe45beae71c97938f2cb067e0ec22c1c7760eacf (patch) | |
| tree | 128c1e2d43ff7e57fe63b5594d2235b85ec4bdd9 | |
| parent | 15e61fe2a7b6b500bf09d34d703e3b447fbd5e08 (diff) | |
response - you are correct, ULs require >= 1 LI children
| -rw-r--r-- | doc/bugs/map_fails_to_close_ul_element_for_empty_list.mdwn | 7 |
1 files changed, 7 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/bugs/map_fails_to_close_ul_element_for_empty_list.mdwn b/doc/bugs/map_fails_to_close_ul_element_for_empty_list.mdwn index 4ce257252..a3bd3cc01 100644 --- a/doc/bugs/map_fails_to_close_ul_element_for_empty_list.mdwn +++ b/doc/bugs/map_fails_to_close_ul_element_for_empty_list.mdwn @@ -38,3 +38,10 @@ Patch[[!tag patch]]: > could `map` instead delay emitting the first `<ul>` until it determines that > it will have at least one item? Perhaps refactoring that function into > something easier to regression-test would be useful. --[[smcv]] + +>> You are right (just checked 4.01 DTD to confirm). I suspect refactoring +>> the function would be wise. From my brief look at it to formulate the +>> above I thought it was a bit icky. I'm not a good judge of what would +>> be regression-test friendly but I might have a go at reworking it. With +>> this variety of problem I have a strong inclination to use things like +>> map. - [[Jon]] |