- From: Rick <graham.rick@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 13:46:11 -0400
- To: www-svg@w3.org, public-html@w3.org
On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 4:09 AM, David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk> wrote: > Rick wrote: > >> Try filing feature requests. If someone implements it, and it turns >> out to be as good a thing as it seems, other UA's will follow. > > Markets generally only act on wants, this issue is more about needs. > > The problem here is that the people who would most benefit from this sort of > feature are the least likely to be aware that they have a problem in the > first place. That sounds like a strawman argument, what people? The topic of this thread basically boils down to this. Is it within the realm of a document specification to impose rules on a user agent beyond the scope of the document definition. That is very dangerous ground. If you (and others) feel that UI's are incomplete without the ability to provide a pretty print of the DOM, then you should take it up with the Browsers, not attempt to expand the scope of the document specification to include things outside of its mandate. Whether or not the tool is useful, and how educated the benefactors are is of no consequence in the discussion. I agree personally that the concept has merit, I disagree strongly with this approach. > > -- > David Woolley > Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want. > RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam, > that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work. > > -- Cheers! Rick
Received on Wednesday, 18 March 2009 17:46:50 UTC