W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2005

Re: [css3-ui] Problems with :read-only and :read-write

From: Laurens Holst <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl>
Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2005 00:40:52 +0200
Message-ID: <42F29974.9020108@students.cs.uu.nl>
To: Orion Adrian <orion.adrian@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style@w3.org

Orion Adrian wrote:
> This is where the catch 22 comes in. I've been told there's no
> problem, everything is peachy. When I say, hey things could be better,
> I'm then told make something up.
Indeed, complaining alone without giving something concrete is both easy 
and useless. You need to make a convincing proof of concept to show what 
you are talking about is really different from and better than what 
exists right now.

> After I'm told to make something up I
> do and then people say there's no problem.
If you are talking about your ‘layout’ proposal, I certainly hope it was 
made clear enough that it was a clumsy and limited model that didn’t 
really add anything that couldn’t already be done in XHTML + CSS (or 
even XFrames), with the same level of separation and semantics. With 
this particular proposal, CSS could have done the layout just fine, and 
the XHTML 2.0 role attribute would have fulfilled the semantic hints 
that you wanted to give. So indeed, there is no problem with the current 
model, or at least the proposal that you made did not show any.

> When confronted, I'm
> usually just told to go away and start something somewhere else. The
> rediculousness of it all is just a little insane.
So, what I find ridiculous, is that even though people give extensive 
and valid comments as to why your proposal is bad, you apparently either 
totally forgot about them or ignored them in the first place, because 
you never tried to improve it based on the comments, and still seem to 
think that you made a good proposal.

What I find even more ridiculous is that you somehow manage to put the 
blame for that on the people on this list and insanity, instead of being 
a little bit introspective and realising that you need to come up with 
something better and more solid than just complaints and a bad proposal.


p.s. in that proposal you made, you introduced a difficult and limited 
syntax involving ‘+’ and ‘%’ and the likes... It would have been better 
if you hadn’t done that, because as far as I understand the core of your 
issues lays elsewhere.

Ushiko-san! Kimi wa doushite, Ushiko-san!!
Laurens Holst, student, university of Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Website: www.grauw.nl. Backbase employee; www.backbase.com.
Received on Thursday, 4 August 2005 22:40:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:27:20 UTC