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

Re: CSS is doomed (10 years per version ?!?)

From: Laurens Holst <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl>
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 18:04:56 +0200
Message-ID: <42C569A8.5040707@students.cs.uu.nl>
To: Orion Adrian <orion.adrian@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style@w3.org

Orion Adrian wrote:

>>Could you please drop the 10 years? You are comparing a number that
>>included 5 years of user adoption time with a number that doesn't. The
>>turn-around (as-in implementation is available after specification) of
>>CSS is also closer to 5 years.
>>    
>>
>Sorry, no. Because I believe Microsoft can do it and has done it in 5.
>CSS 2.1 still hasn't come out of CR. It could very well be 15 years
>before it sees widespead use or even 20. .Net 2.0 is already seeing
>some use and will have fairly widespread adoption within 1-2 years.
>Exact numbers I don't have.
>  
>
A big part of it already sees widespread use. You’re disregarding that. 
Anyways.

You say: "Because I believe Microsoft can do it and has done it in 5."

What makes CSS so inherently different that Microsoft couldn’t do it in 
5 years? They didn’t, but they could have.

This is not a problem with the specs, or standards in general, nor a 
disadvantage compared to proprietary technologies. The cause of this 
particular problem lies with Microsoft, which has been negligent of 
their ‘duties’ after acquiring a monopoly position, forcing CSS into a 
standstill (or at least a slowdown) from an authoring point of view.

The only reason why the technologies you mentioned *are* in development 
at Microsoft is because Microsoft has for the past four years been 
mainly focusing on OS development (note: to my knowledge there is no 
public standard which does the same as XAML, although XForms probably 
comes close). Without development effort assigned to it, a technology 
obviously will not be developed.

So I really really don’t see what you are trying to prove here. Unless 
it is that ‘technologies that a big company pays people for to develop 
will be developed quickly’. But that seems evident. And irrelevant to 
the subject of this discussion, that CSS is doomed. Or perhaps to say 
that the success of standards depend on adoption by vendors, but that 
much, too, is obvious.


~Grauw

-- 
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 Friday, 1 July 2005 16:04:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:39 GMT