W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 1997

Bad CSS implementations

From: T. V. Raman <raman@Adobe.COM>
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 15:07:41 -0700
Message-Id: <199708042207.PAA26437@labrador>
To: David Siegel <dave@verso.com>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
David Siegel writes:
 
 > I believe part of the problem is that the W3C never had an adoption
 > program, never had any plans for verifying implementations, and generally
 > pulled up short on insisting that the browser companies build something we
 > can all use. I would go so far as to say this goes all the way to Tim BL.

Unfortunately, users with special needs face an even worse nightmare.
The various mainstream browsers
are moving from being pretty much unusable
to making some claims about "paying attention to special needs"
but once again, there is no clear validation path for
verifying a browser's assertion that "the browser is accessible to users with
special needs" nor do I see any possibility of such a verification effort
becoming a part of the standards.

 > We proposed creating a verification suite for CSS early in 1997, and the
 > W3C never thought it was important enough to do. They just publish the
 > spec, and the companies do the rest. Perhaps in the future they will think
 > about implementation standards so we don't end up with half-baked
 > solutions. I am disappointed to see that the browser companies act like
 > children when it comes to incorporating basic typographic control into
 > their browsers, and still we don't have PNG, or a widespread vector-graphic
 > standard, or a widespread midi implementation, and don't even get me
 > started on the font situation. Legacy decisions don't just hurt us, they
 > hurt our customers and those who use the web daily. 
 > 
 > I think what we can learn from this thread is that the W3C and the browser
 > companies have a lax attitude toward implementation standards. Rather than
 > waiting for press-announcement surprises and "cool" demos of floating
 > logos, we should all agree that basic typographic control is a right, not a
 > privelege, and that the browser companies have nothing to gain from shoddy
 > implementations. The only way out is a reference standard. Only when the
 > attitudes change will we see fundamental improvement. It's too late for the
 > 4.0 browsers. Let's see what we can do about the 5.0s. 
 > 
 > 
 > David Siegel              415 278-9900 x22     fax 278-9911
 > 
 > S T U D I O   V E R S O   512 2nd Street, San Francisco, CA 94107
 > 
 > http://www.verso.com      http://www.killersites.com     
 > http://www.highfive.com   http://www.dsiegel.com
 > 
 > Coming soon! -- http://www.secretsites.com
 > 
 > "The only place where Success comes before Work is in the dictionary."
 > 	-- Vidal Sassoon

-- 
Best Regards,
--raman

      Adobe Systems                 Tel: 1 (408) 536 3945   (W14-129)
      Advanced Technology Group     Fax: 1 (408) 537 4042 
      (W14 129) 345 Park Avenue     Email: raman@adobe.com 
      San Jose , CA 95110 -2704     Email:  raman@cs.cornell.edu
      http://labrador.corp.adobe.com/~raman/raman.html (Adobe  Internal)
      http://www.cs.cornell.edu/Info/People/raman/raman.html  (Cornell)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are my own and in no way should be taken
as representative of my employer, Adobe Systems Inc.
____________________________________________________________
Received on Monday, 4 August 1997 18:07:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:53:51 GMT