- From: Matthew Raymond <mattraymond@earthlink.net>
- Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 12:09:46 -0400
Jim Ley wrote:
>>The idea is to implement these features in IE. That's a requirement.
>
> I understood the requirement to be degradeable in downlevel browsers
> including the ability to provide more enhanced fallback of the new
> features, via both browser plugins and scripting in UA's such as
> Internet explorer.
>
> What I did not understand it to mean, is that the implementation of
> the features in IE (what does that mean by the way, which versions
> platforms etc. Could you clarify the design goals, if they're not
> what my first paragraph gives) were dependant on a particular
> methodology.
I think it's pretty clear that any WHAT WG markup we come up with
needs to work in IE using HTC and/or Javascript, NOT A PLUG-IN. We can't
hope to get a plug-in installed in hundreds of millions of browsers. By
contrast, most of those browser have Javascript on and support HTC.
Therefore, we should not use markup that we can't make work using
non-binary methods.
Received on Wednesday, 14 July 2004 09:09:46 UTC