W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > February 2000

RE: Phoney Baloney (was "fighting...")

From: Chris Wilson <cwilso@MICROSOFT.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2000 19:01:45 -0800
Message-ID: <C35556591D34D111BB5600805F1961B91D5CDF51@RED-MSG-47>
To: "'Arjun Ray'" <aray@q2.net>, www-html@w3.org
Arjun Ray [mailto:aray@q2.net] wrote:
>On Wed, 23 Feb 2000, Chris Wilson wrote:
>> Did I miss something here?  Did this document identify itself as
>> XHTML 1.1?
>
>Did it need to?

Yes, if it was being held up as a counter example to my claim that no
Microsoft apps generate XHTML 1.1 with inline STYLE attributes.  Read the
thread you're responding to before blindly flaming the Microsoft guy,
please.

>> As for that content - the "if gte vml" etc. bit is a conditional
>> comment syntax
>
>A what?

Which word are you having trouble with?
Conditional: 2) Imposing, depending on, or containing a condition.
Comment: 4) _Computer_Science_. Text in a program that does not function in
the program itself but is used by the programmer to explain instructions. 
[Thanks to the American Heritage dictionary at www.dictionary.com.]

A conditional comment is therefore a mechanism that comments out a
particular section under select conditions - e.g., if the version of any
installed instance of VML is less than a particular version number.  Ask
Netscape, they actually implemented something similar a few years back,
although it used Javascript for its expressions.

>> that Office came up with as the necessary (for them) solution to
>> the problem of different INSTALLED BASE browsers breaking on their
>> content.
>
>This kind of brochureware-speak really gets to me.  I think this is
>required reading, before any more excuses deflect the issues:
>
>   http://www.mit.edu/people/grainer/frankfurt.html 

%#^()%*^$#()^, I was responding to ONE ISSUE Murray brought up - Microsoft's
supposed "requirement" that XHTML 1.1 have an inline style attribute because
(supposedly) we already had XHTML 1.1 being generated with STYLE attributes.
We do not have XHTML 1.1 being generated AT ALL, as far as I know.  This is
not a discussion about Office's HTML generation - if you want to bitch about
that, go find an appropriate thread and an appropriate person.  I'm not
talking about Office.

>> They did not want Netscape Navigator 4.x, for example, to make
>> their documents look bad simply because they didn't support VML,
>> or had incredibly bad CSS positioning support.
>
>You really don't get it, do you?  Why does any of this barf (as Jason
>calls it) have to appear in an HTML document...
> ... that is *not* *kept* *away* from a ***NON***O2K app?

No, YOU don't get it.  I DO NOT WORK ON THE OFFICE TEAM. IT IS NOT MY JOB,
MY INTEREST OR MY INTENT TO JUSTIFY OFFICE'S DECISIONS.  IF YOU WANT TO
WHINE ABOUT IT, DO IT TO SOMEONE ELSE - I'M NOT INTERESTED.  Congratulations
- you've just won the award of being first in my killfile.

>Who gave you the g*ddamn right?

Presumably the same person who gave it to you.

-Chris Wilson
Received on Wednesday, 23 February 2000 22:03:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:42 GMT