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

Re: Block-based parsing; allow lies

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 12:08:38 -0500
Message-ID: <43285916.4040009@mit.edu>
To: Emrah BASKAYA <emrahbaskaya@hesido.com>
CC: www-style <www-style@w3.org>

Emrah BASKAYA wrote:
> So how would @require hurt us more than the current situation does? 

Mostly in terms of the amount of work needed to get it to happen.

> Oh, and it is 100% future proof, as things would only get better with better standards 
> support.

Assuming the future brings better standards support instead of the standards 
redefining how things should work (like CSS2.1 did for generated content, say), 
and making used-to-be-compliant impls effectively non-compliant.

> ->I can make my design stand-out using new CSS features, while making 
> sure I am providing an optimized experience for older UA's. Without 
> "required", I don't have *as many* options as I would have with it, do 
> I? (and it is not all that bad to have more options on the plate)

The question is whether this option brings enough benefit to be worth the work.

> ->Given enough time, all browser who claim support will support the 
> properties more ideally.

Perhaps.  I have yet to see that happening.

Received on Wednesday, 14 September 2005 17:08:52 UTC

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