- From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 13:00:20 -0800
- To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Well, I don't see why all that web content should always be in HTML and all that style information in CSS either. Things ought to be way more diverse than that. There are people who can write SGML you know. Isn't this all hard on them ? Oh. Wait. Standards. American English happens to be the widely accepted de facto standard to define programming languages and other vocabularies such as CSS. There is nothing personal or national or whatever about it; American English is not being 'favored' any differently than HTML or XML or CSS are. The cost of breaking with *that* standard are in practice so high as to dilute whatever benefits your own standard proposal may have, drowning its very chance of becoming, well, a standard. I certainly fail to see how the world or society can be made more 'inclusive' by allowing - at great cost - each individual to safely remain within the realm of his own language, conventions and culture at every possible level of activity. Maybe it's native English speakers who should wonder if it's healthy and inclusive for them to not have to go through an effort that has become second nature for so many of the rest of us ? http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13103967
Received on Thursday, 19 February 2009 21:03:07 UTC