- From: Orion Adrian <oadrian@hotmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2004 12:20:31 -0400
- To: www-html@w3.org
> > My desire for simplicity is for authorship first and implementation > > second. Why? Because these documents are going to be authored a lot > > more often than implemented. > >This approach is not realistic. The best you can do is to weigh up the >benefits. > >Otherwise you might just as well claim that computers should generally >think for you. After all, they are much more often used than invented... > >It doesn't help that a standard is nice to the user/author, if it can't >realistically be implemented with current technology. Today it's easier >to create a fairly complete operating system than a fairly complete web >browser! And even the most advanced existing browsers still implement >only a fraction of what W3C has devised. Which is because the idea of a complete operating system isn't nearly as modern as a complete browser. I agree that simplicity of authorship and simplicity of implementation are very important and they usually go hand in hand -- usually. And I fully expect any specs being written or revised now to take into consideration how difficult something is to implement. What I don't care for is specs that give us neither. As you said in another post CSS2 and XForms give you more of a headache than backwards compatibility. There are various reasons that these specs are unusable and unimplementable and I usually find that the ones that are difficult to author are also difficult to implement and vice-versa. Orion Adrian _________________________________________________________________ Watch LIVE baseball games on your computer with MLB.TV, included with MSN Premium! http://join.msn.com/?page=features/mlb&pgmarket=en-us/go/onm00200439ave/direct/01/
Received on Friday, 9 April 2004 12:21:03 UTC