W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > March 2008

Re: CSS WG - Pulling Back the Curtains

From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 09:42:41 -0700
To: Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <20080328164241.GA17375@ridley.dbaron.org>

On Friday 2008-03-28 03:54 -0700, Alan Gresley wrote:
> Seeing that I didn't get one challenge from my latest list
> message. I am either correct or what I said was totally
> irrelevant. But having no indication either way I can not be in
> any possition to know.

Are you referring to
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Mar/0337.html ?
It's much better to include a URL to things you cite (spending the
minute or so of work to find them yourself) rather than making every
reader of your message do that work (costing potentially hours of
total time, although probably most people just won't bother to
figure out what you're talking about and will just skip the message).

If that's what you're referring to -- I find the message unclear
since it jumps from topic to topic without saying how they're
related.  Many of them would require a good bit of investigation, or
at least a few minutes each to understand what you're talking about
before realizing that I know the answer off the top of my head.  (A
number of the message simply point to tests and assume that it's
obvious to the reader what the test is testing, which generally
takes at least a few minutes to figure out.  Actually saying what
the question is would make it much more likely for you to get a
reply.)  And since I don't have time to respond to all the topics at
once, I didn't respond to the message even though I might have been
able to answer a significant portion of the questions.  (You also
don't have any right to demand that I, or anyone else in particular,
help you understand a particular issue.)

In it (the URL above), you wrote:
  # I didn't get a reply to my original questions. I can only assume
  # that that's because know one knows the answer.
I don't think that's a correct assumption.  It may well be because
the question wasn't clear (which could be because it contained too
little or too much information, or for other reasons).

-David

-- 
L. David Baron                                 http://dbaron.org/
Mozilla Corporation                       http://www.mozilla.com/
Received on Friday, 28 March 2008 16:43:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:55:02 GMT