[4.0] com_finder ul instead of dl for easier styling

[hans2103]

Pull Request for Issue # .

Summary of Changes

• DL => UL conversion
• DL was implemented in [4.0] Reworking result layout of com_finder #20572 by @Hackwar

quote from @Hackwar taken from a private message to find out reason of changing ul to dl

I used a DL because I considered that the syntactically correct structure. There is no deeper reasoning.

Changing it from DL back to UL makes it easier for frontend developers to style each search result.
Styling DT+DD is not as easy as styling a LI

Testing Instructions

• Go to the search results.
  • using Joomla 4 with Blog Sample Data it will be the following url with blog as searched word.
    /index.php/component/finder/search?q=blog&Itemid=101&Itemid=101
• Inspect element on the search results and see the HTML structure
• Apply this PR, refresh the page
• Inspect element on the search results and see the HTML structure

Actual result BEFORE applying this Pull Request

It is very hard to style dt+dd+dd+dd as a card. Try adding a background image, box-shadow and spacing between the individual search results.

Expected result AFTER applying this Pull Request

After applying this PR it is much easier to style individual search results.

Documentation Changes Required

[paternax]

I have tested this item ✅ successfully on c9f4593

The code looks like described.

Perhaps a bit overstructured in the inner part of the li-element. There are three levels: header->h4->a for each result title and three times the same class: result-title(in li, header and h4)

---

_{This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/30534.}

[hans2103]

Thank you for testing.

@paternax

Perhaps a bit overstructured in the inner part of the li-element. There are three levels: header->h4->a for each result title and three times the same class: result-title(in li, header and h4)

After merging this PR where DL will be replaced by UL I will create a new PR to simplify the HTML structure of a search result. I agree on the HTML structure.

[Quy]

I have tested this item ✅ successfully on c9f4593

---

_{This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/30534.}

[Quy]

RTC

---

_{This comment was created with the J!Tracker Application at issues.joomla.org/tracker/joomla-cms/30534.}

[wilsonge]

Makes sense. But given it’s search results I assume ol is more logical than ul as they are ordered by search relevancy

[hans2103]

@wilsonge can changing ul into ol be done in another PR?
The impact is bigger... since the search results can be stretched over multiple pages a <li start="number"> should be added to prevent the numbering start over on 1 on the second page and so on.

[wilsonge]

Thats true. But still think it makes more sense to do it like that

[wilsonge]

Thanks!

[hans2103]

@wilsonge Created a draft PR to adjust individual search result #30550
Including using a ol instead of ul