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

Re: Browsers will never get it right [was Re:Blocked-base parsing?]

From: Emrah BASKAYA <emrahbaskaya@hesido.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 10:28:17 +0300
To: orion.adrian@gmail.com, www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.sw4u1f1p8nstxa@lomarnona>

On Thu, 15 Sep 2005 05:43:37 +0300, Orion Adrian <orion.adrian@gmail.com>  

> So I say that a new model is already upon us. I say that it's time we
> took a look and see why so many people are starting to prefer RSS over
> standard HTML feeds and in that view I find we'll see that client side
> CSS and Javascript isn't a good solution.

You are over-simplifying the reason RSS became so popular. RSS did not  
become popular solely because it had little or no style information. Sure,  
their simplicity in not having fancy embedded styles does provide much  
wider access but it mainly allowed people to gather information on their  
favourite subjects without them having to visit each and every of their  
favourite sites. And let's not forget it is those sites that let them meet  
with RSS in the first place. I don't think people subscribe to an RSS feed  
just because they like their subjects, I'd assume they'd subscribe to the  
feeds of the sites they already like.

On: Re: Block-based parsing; allow lies
> At what level do we simply say no? To get the benefit we actually care
> about, we're now writing multiple types of layouts.

Why do we have to say no? No one is forced to do multiple type of layouts.  
There'd be a need to do multiple types of layouts if the specs differed  
vastly, and in such a case, we'd awfully need such a solution anyway. And  
if we don't need such a solution for doing multiple layouts, I don't see  
the harm in having it. But from what I understand, you don't like authors  
to have control over the style they themselves have authored, and you  
don't like authors deciding what part of their content is considered more  
important through use of CSS and javascript, considering it is a bad  
thing. I don't consider that bad, and I am glad I don't browse the  
internet seeing the same style on web page.

If we ditched author styling and javascript all together, I am 100% sure  
the authors would provide "recommended user styles" for their content, and  
even ones that are fully abiding to standards might feel the need to  
recommend a specific UA because its functions suit his site better, he  
couldn't fill in the gaps himself by providing a simple web-based  
application for certain operations going on in his site. We can't provide  
standards for every and every bit of detail, but only provide a general  
outline. An author can build his content around those standards, and  
create details with his own unique methods. Having the same exact DNA  
never could help any species, there has to be a flexibility for times when  
the need be.

Received on Thursday, 15 September 2005 07:28:50 UTC

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