W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > April 2004

Re: complexity

From: Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 18:41:06 -0700
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: <olafBuddenhagen@web.de>, <www-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BCA9CD72.3C3B7%tantek@cs.stanford.edu>

On 4/19/04 6:19 PM, "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:

>> It is perfectly reasonable* to build a declarative-only browser engine whose
>> aim would be to support interactive documents with declarative technologies
>> like XHTML and CSS while foregoing all the complexities (and security and
>> accessibility problems etc.) of DOM and scripting support.
> It's amusing that you immediately assumed I was talking about scripting. I
> didn't mention non-declarative technologies at all.

You mentioned an "application platform", which implies/necessitates
procedural support and scripting follows logically from that on the Web.
Also, "DHTML" is often referred to as an "application platform" in the
context of the web, and that too relies on scripting.

> And an XHTML+CSS UA would still be a lot of work; more, I would postulate,
> than a single person could accomplish while still keeping abreast of new
> developments in those technologies.

I didn't say it would be easy. I could just see that a single very smart
dedicated person might be able to build this.

> (Not to mention SVG, XForms, XML Events, XPath, etc,
> that would be part of
> a W3C, non-scripting-based,

Why? I've yet to see evidence that there is a need for any of those in
particular on the *Web*.  There have been offhanded mentions of doing a
simple "CSS shapes" proposal that handles 90% of what web authors might use
SVG for.  You yourself have proposed a much simpler HTML Forms extension.
Are XML Events necessary in Web documents?  XPath for that matter?

> application platform environment.)

You're stuck on that term.  IMHO a semantic XHTML document styled with a bit
of CSS for a mostly static and somewhat interactive presentation is *not* an
application.  It's a document.  There's a lot of value in documents.  Even
TBL makes the distinction on his personal web page [1].

>> *Try turning off scripting support in your favorite browser and browsing
>> typical sites.  You'll find that most sites work just fine with scripting
>> turned off.
> Actually, based on both my personal experience and the volume of bug
> reports in both Mozilla and Opera bug systems reporting sites that fail
> due to broken DOM support, it would appear that a large number of sites do
> not, in fact, work without scripting.

You misunderstand.  Of course not all the visual effects as intended with
animated drop-down menus etc. are available, and thus bug reports are made.
Bug reports fail to communicate what matters.

The point is that most such sites work just fine in terms of viewing the
content, clicking links, navigating etc.


See the section titled "What not to email".
Received on Monday, 19 April 2004 21:40:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:06:08 UTC