W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > December 2002

Re: comments on 2002-12-12 XHTML 2.0 WD

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 09:45:31 -0500
Message-Id: <200212181445.JAA05463@buzzword-bingo.mit.edu>
To: Daniel Glazman <glazou_2000@yahoo.fr>
cc: www-html@w3.org

>    In particular, the new elements XHTML 2.0 introduces like NL have no
>    historical record on the Web. Without a normative style definition,
>    I bet we'll have different renderings for them in different implems.

Yes, I bet we will, at first.  And with a normative definition, we will
straight-jacket UA implementors' in a matter that is, at heart, part of the
UA's user interface, stifling any innovation that could happen in the rendering
of this element on the part of the UA implementors....

In my mind, NL is no different from the HTML4 SELECT, which also has no defined
rendering past the vague concept of "size" and is implemented quite differently
(as far as behavior, look, geometry, etc) in different browsers.  I have seen
very few instances of that being an issue.

God does not play dice with the universe: he plays an
ineffable game of his own devising, which might be
compared, from the perspective of any of the other
players, to being involved in an obscure and complex
version of poker in a pitch-dark room, with blank
cards, for infinite stakes, with a dealer who won't
tell you the rules, and who smiles all the time.

  -- Good Omens: The Nice and Accurate Prophecies of
     Agnes Nutter, Witch, by Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett
Received on Wednesday, 18 December 2002 09:50:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:06:01 UTC