On Tue, 08 Apr 2014 20:33:19 -0400, Arjun Ray wrote:
> <aircraft-approach-procedure html='ol'>
> <transition html='li'>Contact control tower</transition>
> <transition html='li'>Enter glide slope</transition>
> <transition html='li'>Correct for wind conditions</transition>
> </aircraft-approach-procedure>
Interesting point. It does raise the question of what happens, with
both forms, when editing.
<aircraft-approach-procedure>
<transition>Contact control tower</transition>
<transition>Enter glide slope</transition>
<transition>Correct for wind conditions</transition>
</aircraft-approach-procedure>
Oops. We forgot a step. "Navigate to control-supplied approach vector".
<aircraft-approach-procedure>
<transition>Contact control tower</transition>
<transition>Navigate to control-supplied approach
vector</transition>
<transition>Enter glide slope</transition>
<transition>Correct for wind conditions</transition>
</aircraft-approach-procedure>
Or, using Roger's preferred format:
<aircraft-approach-procedure>
<transition step="2">Navigate to control-supplied approach
vector</transition>
<transition step="3">Enter glide slope</transition>
<transition step="43">Correct for wind conditions</transition>
<transition step="1">Contact control tower</transition>
</aircraft-approach-procedure>
So, yeah, I guess we could say that both forms are equally robust; you
just have to increment all the steps by one, and nobody could screw
that up.
Amy!
--
Amelia A. Lewis amyzing {at} talsever.com
To be whole is to be part; true voyage is return.
-- Laia Asieo Odo [Ursula K. LeGuin, "The Dispossessed"]
