When an ordered list does not use one of the default counter types, the list is rendered with explicit counters (not using [CSS counters](), which are arguably less flexible). This uses a definition list in HTML, with the counter in <dt> and the list item in <dd>. However, in doing so, the value of the spacing attribute is ignored.
The right answer here would be to add a class of "compact" to the list and let the style system work itself out. However, that is not consistent with existing design choices. For reasons I don't understand, each of the list types uses a different class when spacing="compact", so this would need to be either dlCompact (which would engage with existing style rules for compact definition lists) or olCompact (because the original source is an ordered list). Given direction on this question, I could submit a pull request.
Describe the issue
When an ordered list does not use one of the default counter types, the list is rendered with explicit counters (not using [CSS counters](), which are arguably less flexible). This uses a definition list in HTML, with the counter in
<dt>and the list item in<dd>. However, in doing so, the value of thespacingattribute is ignored.The right answer here would be to add a class of "compact" to the list and let the style system work itself out. However, that is not consistent with existing design choices. For reasons I don't understand, each of the list types uses a different class when
spacing="compact", so this would need to be eitherdlCompact(which would engage with existing style rules for compact definition lists) orolCompact(because the original source is an ordered list). Given direction on this question, I could submit a pull request.Code of Conduct