W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2002

Re: conformance (was layout solutions blah blah blah)

From: Rijk van Geijtenbeek <rijk@iname.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 22:57:10 +0100
Message-ID: <17044666954.20020129225710@iname.com>
To: www-style@w3.org
Hello Christian,

On Tuesday, January 29, 2002 you wrote:

> Am Montag, 28. Januar 2002 16:23 schrieb Hoyt, Phil:
>> In defence of the Browser makers: Jesse, reporting bugs admirable and
>> useful, but I think you would do well to keep your broad judgements on the
>> quality of software and software companies off this list. It is
>> counterproductive in that it doesn't point out any fact that was not
>> already known and only serves to offend and anger people without whom you
>> might not have a browser at all. Microsoft deserves credit for providing a
>> browser that (still) provides among the best css support out there.

> I would agree with you, if Microsoft would not offend us,
> a) the users, that try to visit MS pages with non-MS browsers, ("your browser 
> is not standards compliant" - but MS, so is yours?)
> b) the vendors of other browsers, (by the same thing stated above)

> But since MS behave contrary, Jesse's got me full on his/her side.

  I'm on Phil's site: this discussion is counterproductive. Tantek
  was explicitly talking about CSS1 conformance. That's also his area
  of expertise and (partly, I assume) responsability. Generic comments
  from MS and MSN marketing about standards support, however ill
  advised, should not be related to his claims about CSS1, and are off
  topic for this list. 

  I'm sure there are warts in any browsers CSS1 conformance (on the
  new CSS-Discuss lists problems with many floats in MacIE were
  discussed, and I know of some bugs in Opera).

 Rijk                            mailto:rijk@iname.com

Mot du Jour:
Bureaucrats cut red tape, lengthwise.
Received on Tuesday, 29 January 2002 16:54:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:27:00 UTC