David Hyatt wrote: > So Microsoft can propose cool new ideas like: > > http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-css3-grid-20070905/ > > ...and have them worked on because they happen to fall under the scope > of the current charter? > > However when Apple proposes something that happens to lie outside the > scope of the current charter, your response is "No! We shouldn't do that!" > > While I can understand that your engine is struggling to play catch-up > after years of neglect on your company's part, that's no excuse for > holding the rest of the Web back. Some of us have largely completed > CSS2.1 and would like to see CSS improve significantly in the coming years. > > Finally, Silverlight implements many of these ideas and is being pushed > for use on the Web. I guess "cool" is ok when it's part of your > company's proprietary technology stack. David, like it or not, Paul has a point : the CSS WG has not released a single REC in ten years... Whatever is the interest of your proposals, zilch, low, high or fantastic, prioritizing our work is in itself a priority and we must push our existing CRs to REC. It's not only a question of standard, it's also a more complex question of IPR. And that's why we absolutely need the discussions on the charter we're going to have tomorrow. I hope you agree with that. </Daniel>Received on Wednesday, 26 March 2008 01:54:30 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 11 September 2008 23:29:06 GMT