3

When you type "1.", "2.", etc. in the editor, it creates a numbered list. But it always creates a list that starts from 1, no matter what number you type.

So, when you type:

    > 1. Item number one.

    Commenting on item number one.

    > 2. Item number two.

    Commenting on item number two.

You get this:

  1. Item number one.

Commenting on item number one.

  1. Item number two.

Commenting on item number two.


Here is a real-life example of this bug. What the code should do instead is use the start attribute of the <ol> tag, e.g. for the second item it should generate <ol start="2">.

It is simply not a good user experience if the user types "2." and gets "1." instead.

flag

1 Answer

2

As you've done it, markdown thinks a new list is being started. If your suggestion were to be implemented there'd be no way to have two lists in a post.

There is a workaround though. You could try doing it like this instead:

  1. Item number one
    Comment on item number one
  2. Item number two
    Comment on item number two

Note the comment is indented, and two spaces are used after the text on each line to force the newline, so it would be input like this:

1. Item number one  //note two spaces here
  Comment on item number one
2. Item number two  //note two spaces here too
  Comment on item number two
link|flag
Why do you say that there would be no way to have two lists in a post? – Tomasz P. Szynalski Mar 20 at 13:28
I may have misunderstood your request, but as I see it if you allow for lists to continue with arbitrary content separating them then there's no way to indicate the end of a list. Therefore I wouldn't be able to start a new one – Rich Seller Mar 20 at 16:08
Technically there would be many separate lists. The first list would consist of item no. 1 only, the second list would consist of item no. 2 only, etc. To start a new list, you would just type "1.". – Tomasz P. Szynalski Mar 20 at 18:41
@Rich: Your workaround works, but it is not obvious at all. I would have to explicitly teach my users to do it. It shouldn't be this complicated to do this. – Tomasz P. Szynalski Mar 20 at 18:48
1 
@Tomasz, I didn't say it was simple, I just thought you might like to know there is a workaround. I see what you mean about restarting with a 1. This actually makes sense to me – Rich Seller Mar 20 at 18:52

Your Answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.