133022 - <dl compact> should be layed out in a compact way

Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 2055

(Core :: Layout, defect)

Description

[Markus Senoner]

From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/4.61 [en] (Win95; I)
BuildID:    20020315

The tag "DL" does have an attribute "COMPACT", which is ignored by the layout 
engine.  A compact definition-list should have DT and DD fields on the same 
line, while standard rendering puts DT and DD on separate lines.  

Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1. write a HTML-page with:
<dl compact><dt>a<dd>first<dt>b<dt>second</dl>
2. save it
3. open the file with the browser


Actual Results:  Mozilla renders the HTML by showing 4 lines like:

a
 first
b
 second


Expected Results:  I expected rendering on 2 lines:

a  first
b  second


This layout bug is present in all Mozilla-versions.
If this tag were rendered correctly, I would use the DL-tag more often instead 
of using nested tables to control layout of lists...

Comment 1

[Christopher Hoess (gone)]

This attribute does not exist in HTML 4.  Unfortunately, the CSS property display: compact, which could be used for this, is not supported (separate bug). INVALID

Comment 2

[Christopher Aillon (sabbatical, not receiving bugmail)]

Actually, compact does exist in HTMl 4.01:
http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/lists.html#adef-compact

However it is deprecated and should not be used.  Reopening to dupe to bug 2055,
which covers this issue.

Comment 3

[Christopher Aillon (sabbatical, not receiving bugmail)]

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 2055 ***

Comment 4

[Markus Senoner]

<DL COMPACT> is deprecated, but not obsolete in HTML 4.01.
Deprecated attributes should still be rendered in browsers for backward 
compatibility.

Is there a way to specify compact rendering of DL in style-sheets?
I fear not!  One more reason to still support <DL COMPACT>.

Comment 5

[Christine Hoffman]

Changing QA contact

Comment 6

[Boris Zbarsky [:bzbarsky]]

Re-marking duplicate, since the other bug is precisely about this.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 2055 ***