Ah, yes; excellent point.
See below.
Hereâs what makes most sense to me
Numbered lists should stay the way they are
To be more specificâŚ
⌠a ânumberlistâ property on an item makes its direct descendants (not all descendants) numbered.
The alternative solution is confusing
The alternative solution is for the ânumberlistâ property to make just the item itself numbered. But what happens in situations like this?
1. Foo â numberlist
* Bar â not a numberlist
X. Baz â numberlist
Should X be 1 or 2 or 3? Thereâs no clear answer.
Checklists should behave like completion
To be more specificâŚ
The âchecklistâ property of an item makes it have a checkboxâas simple as that. Descendants are not affected.
For why, see the lede and this post.
Whatâs the alternative solution?
The most sensible alternative solution is to make the âchecklistâ property make its direct descendants checkable.
Only âdirect descendantsâ and not âall descendantsâ because of this Trello card.
Only âdirect descendantsâ and not âdirect descendants plus the itemâ itself because of this point that @Erica makes:
The alternative solution is less flexible
i.e. it supports a strict subset of working styles with marginal increased convenience for any working style. See this post.
Conclusion
Ultimately, I think both solutions make sense; one just makes more sense to me than the other.
The solution I favor would indeed make the checklist functionality different from the numbered list functionality, but I think itâs worth it and not confusing if the wording is changed:
Instead of âMake/unmake Checklist,â the option could read âShow/hide checkboxâ or âMake/unmake checkable.â
(To make the transition without affecting the way existing lists look, I guess all the descendants of lists with the âchecklistâ option currently should get assigned the âchecklistâ property as well, and then switch for the UI change can be flipped.)