- From: <kynn-eda@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 11:05:46 -0800 (PST)
- To: poehlman1@home.com (David Poehlman)
- Cc: RRust@COVANSYS.com (RUST Randal), martin.sloan@orange.net ('Martin Sloan'), kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com ('Kynn Bartlett'), harrry@email.com ('Harry Woodrow'), Denise_Wood@operamail.com ('Denise Wood'), w3c-wai-ig@w3.org, charles@w3.org
David wrote: > I would submit two posits. > 1> undue burden is not as easy as it sounds to make a case for. Actually, trying to design anything based on CSS instead presentational markup, and having that still work in Netscape 4, is truly an undue burden -- if just the emotional sense and not the legal sense. My forthcoming CSS book seems to be about 1/2 of "why this won't work on Netscape 4 and why you have to go out of your way to make something which won't fall apart completely." Yes, I'm currently on the anti-Netscape 4 warpath. ;) --Kynn
Received on Wednesday, 16 January 2002 13:59:00 UTC