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

Re: The Progress of CSS

From: Orion Adrian <orion.adrian@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 23:42:51 -0400
Message-ID: <abd6c80105070220427aeb6297@mail.gmail.com>
To: www-style@w3.org

On 7/2/05, Christopher Aillon <caillon@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 07/02/2005 10:17 PM, Orion Adrian wrote:
> 
> >It took less than 2 years to completely port .Net 1.0 over to Linux.
> >Could it possibly be that CSS is just a might too complex or badly
> >architected?
> >
> >I actually had a project where I wrote ASP.Net code for Linux that ran
> >from Apache. Now why was it easier for Open Source people to write an
> >entire platform for code execution including a compiler than to write
> >a browser that fully supported CSS 1.0? Me wonder.
> >
> >
> Comparing implementation times of a programming language specification
> to a presentational specification is rather unfair.  Try comparing to
> (for example) Mozilla's JavaScript and E4X support instead.  That said,
> there are other things on the presentational side that browser makers
> must worry about.  There are a bunch of specifications which need to
> interoperate adding that many more layers of complexity.

If I'm not mistaken, the system includes a presentation specification
in it used to do styling and layout. It also includes a host of other
tools.

The core difference here is that using reflector they could look at
the actual soure and duplicate it. Microsoft did the work up front and
they just ported the code.

Orion Adrian
Received on Sunday, 3 July 2005 03:42:53 GMT

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