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

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

From: Orion Adrian <orion.adrian@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 07:38:56 -0400
Message-ID: <abd6c80105063004385601a0a3@mail.gmail.com>
To: www-style@w3.org

On 6/30/05, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Jun 2005, Orion Adrian wrote:
> >
> > One small problem. No one implemented CSS 2.0. No one really even
> > implemented all of 1.0. My guess given those two data points: no one
> > will fully implement 2.1.
> 
> What parts of CSS1 are not implemented by Mozilla, Opera, and Safari?

I'm fairly sure that I can find some bugs in their implementation.
It's been awhile, but give me time.

> The intent is certainly two have multiple complete implementations of
> CSS2.1 in due course.
> 
> 
> > Maybe it's because I'm a usability guy, but I think try-out/revise would
> > be a better model for the development of these languages. Now you're
> > going to say that that's what you do, but I'm not talking about the spec
> > implementors. I'm talking about the language consumers. You have to look
> > to people who aren't familiar with the spec and the spec's inner
> > workings to try the thing out. Observe where they have trouble and then
> > fix it.
> 
> As you say, I'm going to say that we do. There's a limit to how many
> changes can be made, though, without breaking existing sites (those that
> were written based on the previous version). And we cannot do that.

That's the beauty of moving this solution to a new language - you
don't break existing pages, but honestly breaking existing pages is
the group's own fault. Versioning was invented for a reason.

Orion Adrian
Received on Thursday, 30 June 2005 11:39:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:38 GMT