W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > January 2003

Re: XHTML 2.0 considered harmful

From: Jonny Axelsson <jax@opera.no>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 02:06:27 +0100
To: "www html w3.org" <www-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <opri2io1m2iaf507@localhost>

On Tue, 14 Jan 2003 12:27:50 +0100, Daniel Glazman <glazman@netscape.com> 
wrote:

> (d) sorry to say, but XHTML 2.0 seems to me the live proof that something 
> is going wrong at W3C.

Since we are in the process of airing our personal W3C bugbears, and 
speaking for myself only, right now CSS 3.0 is to me the living proof that 
something is going wrong at W3C. It is a monster that noone will ever 
implement, and it is getting uglier by the month. This from the group with 
the best production and QA rules at the W3C. The exit criteria for each 
single module will be passed for most of them eventually, there will always 
be two implementations, but CSS 3.0 as a whole will be fragmented.

The entire exercise still makes sense to me, because after CSS 3.0 there is 
bound to be a CSS 3.1 (CSS 3--the useable bits), similar to what is now 
happening with CSS 2.1. This spec will be supported by Opera, and 
presumably Netscape and, Microsoft willing, Internet Explorer, as well as 
Konqueror and others. Only a pity that CSS 3.0 seems destined to go through 
a "CSS: The Ultimate Solution" phase first.


-- 
Jonny Axelsson,
Web Standards,
Opera software
Received on Wednesday, 15 January 2003 20:08:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:54 GMT