W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2007

Re: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 16:28:48 -0700
Message-Id: <AE361A94-B623-4C04-84A9-B716C334E757@apple.com>
Cc: public-html@w3.org
To: Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com>


On Apr 16, 2007, at 3:45 PM, Murray Maloney wrote:

> At 02:31 PM 4/16/2007 -0700, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>> On Apr 16, 2007, at 2:03 PM, Murray Maloney wrote:
>>> At 11:07 AM 4/16/2007 -0700, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>>>> On Apr 16, 2007, at 10:39 AM, Murray Maloney wrote:
>>
>> How about you convince me? I actually gave an argument to support my
>> position (specifying rendering is needed for interoperability) and
>> you didn't give any argument for yours.
>
> I disagree with you. That is, you claim that picture-perfect rendering
> is needed for interoperability, but you have not supported that claim.

There are many web pages that become unusable or extremely ugly if  
you don't lay them out to the pixel as expected by the page author.  
If you disagree with this basic fact about the Web, then we don't  
have much basis for discussion. Perhaps you could try browsing the  
Web with Amaya, a browser notable for not matching the rendering in  
other browsers, and see if it is a reasonable experience.

Also, your disagreement doesn't constitute an argument.

> I claim that it is not needed for interoperability, and I have pointed
> out that "picture-perfect" is irrelevant in other modalities.  
> Therefore,
> your argument lacks a foundation.

It really depends on how you define picture-perfect. Some aspects of  
layout in practice need pixel-precision to capture the intent of the  
author and make the page usable. Others don't.

>
>>> While you are at it, please explain how you propose to
>>> accomplish "Picture-perfect rendering" in braille and speech.
>>
>> Notice that I said "for some media" - pixel-precise rendering of
>> certain HTML constructs on visual interactive user agents would not
>> have any effects on aural or braille rendering.
>
> And therefore would not be any help with interoperability.

That is a non sequitur. Providing interoperability for braille and  
aural media is separate from providing it from visual media. To give  
an analogy, user agents with no scripting support exist; but  
nontheless we wish to define interoperability for scripting APIs so  
those that do can work the same.

Regards,
Maciej
Received on Monday, 16 April 2007 23:29:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:42 UTC