- From: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
- Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 16:29:54 +0200
- To: mark.birbeck@x-port.net
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
Mark Birbeck wrote: >> It's not a philosophy, it's just a fact. There are zillions of ugly >> pages (from a markup/css/js/php perspective), and "good" web sites >> are rare pearls. Even editing tools produce code that is ineffective. > > So? Who appointed the CSS gatekeepers judge and jury on what is > 'right' on the web? Oh come on, Mark, please, no rhetoric... With such questions, the HTML WG as it is today should have been dismantled 4 years ago when I started spotting out its incoherences, and when browser vendors stopped contributing to the specs because they disagreed with the general direction taken by the group. There is no gatekeeper. I joined the CSS WG in 1997, and there is not a single person in this group who never made an enhancement proposal. It's sometimes accepted, sometimes refused, and rarely by the same people. That's how compromises emerge, and you _perfectly_ know that. We are not the Keepers of the Temple, we only try to make the specs we author implementable, implementable in a reasonnable time, implementable by all. When an implementor has a good argument against something or in favor of something, we listen to him/her. And sometimes agree, sometimes disagree. Overall, and during those nine years, the CSS WG has accepted MUCH more suggestions than it refused suggestions. It's only a human world, after all. </Daniel>
Received on Monday, 21 August 2006 14:30:12 UTC