W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2011

RE: [css3-gcpm] Printing backgrounds (thread reboot)

From: Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 05:19:08 +0000
To: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Christoph P├Ąper <christoph.paeper@crissov.de>
CC: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <9710FCC2E88860489239BE0308AC5D17124E63@TK5EX14MBXC264.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Andrew Fedoniouk:
> +1 and yet ...
> 
> Wearing one of my hats: art of management is just a talent
> of creation systems of motivations for your subordinates.
> (do not remember where I read this statement)
> 
> I mean that if UAs were strict enough in this subject and show
> "Invalid document" instead of making attempts of rendering it we
> would live with better content.

The world wasn't ready for that when HTML "woke up".  It's arguably still having issues working with it for XML.

> Or at least some sort of "shame on you" watermark, huh?

Sure, that makes the website look "dumb" but how does that help the user get a reasonable and useful print result?

> In the same way as browsers visualize broken certificate now.
> Authors would be motivated to produce something reliable...
> Too extreme?

Much of the web still flags bad or expired certificates; shame hasn't been enough of a motivator.  People often just complain about the messenger/informer ("Why are you asking me questions?  Just render!") because web site authoring perfection isn't the user's priority much (most?) of the time. 

Received on Friday, 19 August 2011 05:19:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:43 GMT