W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-evangelist@w3.org > December 2002

RE: Promotion of XHTML

From: Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 13:50:10 -0700 (MST)
To: fstorr <fffrancis@fstorr.demon.co.uk>
cc: public-evangelist@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.44.0212301320560.87137-100000@measurement-factory.com>

On Mon, 30 Dec 2002, fstorr wrote:

> It really irritates me.  I get called a geek by my intranet manager
> at work - this coming from the man who won't use CSS and uses
> FrontPage for "ease".

To make any progress, we have to at least identify the primary
obstacle:

Are you irritated by the fact that FrontPage is easier to use (for
most humans) than writing raw markup? Are you irritated by the fact
that Microsoft owns FrontPage? Are you irritated by the fact that
other WYSIWYG tools are not as popular/known as FrontPage? Are you
irritated by CSS properties that make writing raw CSS/HTML markup
difficult and generated markup ugly? Are you irritated by browsers
that tolerate invalid markup? Other?

In other words, what should be the first priority: changing human
nature, changing Microsoft, changing W3C marketing, changing CSS/HTML,
or changing browsers?

Simply declaring that "valid markup is better than invalid one" and
"new XHTML is better than old HTML" or even "hand-written markup is
better than generated markup" is not going to change much, IMHO. This
is an "evangelist@w3" mailing list; does evangelism imply pro-active
action or just stating personal preferences?

Alex.

-- 
                            | HTTP performance - Web Polygraph benchmark
www.measurement-factory.com | HTTP compliance+ - Co-Advisor test suite
                            | all of the above - PolyBox appliance
Received on Monday, 30 December 2002 15:50:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 15 July 2011 00:13:21 GMT