W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > March 2004

Re: CSS3 J. King

From: hrhrhr hahaha <kevking@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2004 14:31:32 -1000
To: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <Law11-F49XXaDiqvGI20000bb79@hotmail.com>

>Suggestions for future rules/proposals/whatever they're called this week:

>>Properties.  They've always been called properties.

Hey okay!

I broke the cardinal sin of all web coding geeks and referred to something 
incorrectly, which is why I made light of the fact that I couldn't remember 
their names! Besides, if you read the whole article, it says suggestions for 
proposals as well!

>A new way to link to stylesheets, AND an assurance from ALL the browser  
>members of w3c that they WON'T implement it without either FULL support  or 
>if only particial, then their browser ignores the rule, (as they  should 
>have in versions 1 and 2. Ahem!)

>>Why would you want one?  There's already a half-dozen ways in which styles
>>can be applied to documents, depending on type.

Because half the bloody browsers out there at the moment still don't support 
full CSS 1, let alone CSS2, half of them all recognise the various ways to 
import a stylesheet without resorting to hacks/filters, and some, as we all 
know, (including, I am sure, you), that half of them are buggy if certain 
legitimate rules are applied to them!

If the border url worked in ANY browser I tested on, it would help. Thats 
why I suggested new CSS styles in conjunction with an assurance from ALL W3C 
browser members that they only recognise the rule when they can support the 
bloody thing. (Some hope!)  Besides, images, however small, add more 
download time.

>>Before you think of any more suggestions that will be "ignored", you may
want to do a little more reading.

That reference was to several emails I sent in the past, to the W3C, both 
referring to "proposals" for new CSS rules and properties, and to emails to 
pages that had problems, (and continue to do so), including their "homepage" 
(or do you call it a sitepage?), when I viewed them, but were ignored.

Also, cut the less geeky out there some slack, we're NOT all hand-coding 
24/7. Didn't you make mistakes when referring to something, ever in your 
life, or are you as perfect in your reallife as you are in your CSS referral 
and coding! Jeez!

_________________________________________________________________
Frustrated with dial-up? Lightning-fast Internet access for as low as 
$29.95/month. http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200360ave/direct/01/
Received on Friday, 5 March 2004 19:32:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:27 GMT