How? Do you have code pen or any sample sir?
May be like this →
OK, now I’m confused. I pasted the code @Ray.H posted into the validator and it passed even with the p tags inside the list items. And the “2” that had errors before now passes.
Was there a change made to the doctype in the interim?
Block level elements have always been allowed in a
divs, p, etc.
I guess you missed post #16
Thanks. Goes to show that “I never have” does not mean the same as “I could never have”
I couldn’t understand the context here. Can you please explain?
The W3C Validator checks for syntax errors, it can’t detect semantic errors, that requires a human brain.
The Google Structured Data Testing Tool check structured data mark-up. You don’t have any structured data mark-up on your page, so you are testing for something which is not there, thus there are no results.
This is what I see in Firebox(sic). Add-ons are disabled.
Only that just because I have never put p tags inside of list items doesn’t mean that I couldn’t have if I had wanted to.
It still feels like a stretch of semantics as I understand semantics. Which is why I have never done that. But admittedly what constitutes proper semantics is debatable and I could very well be off base.
Change the font-family to Verdana and test.
Verdana 16 is my browser default.
The point I was trying to make is that It would have been extremely difficult ( I hesitate to say impossible) to style a default decimal list marker and vertically-align the first line of content without the help of another element.
<p> tag ,the
inline-block :pseudo marker increased the line-height of the first line of content.
I think it is better to move to this kind of solution:
Sorry, not familiar with firebox
Is that an add-on
I think he mistyped its firefox.
(sic) Intentionally so written or misspelled (used after a printed word or phrase)
Ok, missed the (sic)
Yeah, I see the same as post #35 now with verdana
I only see the drop on #2 list item. Must be due to the wrapping lines on the inline-block