RE: OPINIONS WANTED: regexps in CSS?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-style-request@w3.org [mailto:www-style-request@w3.org]On
> Behalf Of Ian Hickson
> Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 1998 5:27 PM
> To: wmperry@aventail.com; Bert Bos
> Cc: www-style@w3.org
> Subject: Re: OPINIONS WANTED: regexps in CSS?

> RECAP again:
> *strongly for*
> Braden N. McDaniel
> Ian Hickson
> Todd Fahrner
> William M. Perry (Bill)
> *for*
> Aymeric Poulain Maubant
> Carl Johan Berglund
> Eric A. Meyer (as long as it's not the *only* way of doing things)
> Sevo Stille
> Tim Bagot

Better put me in the "for" group, leaning towards ambivalence.

So far, we've only had one implementor speak up on this, and he's made your
"strongly against" list. This is significant, though I'd certainly like a
larger sampling of the implementor crowd.

I fully agree with those who note that the *last* thing CSS needs right now
is something that will further hamper adoption by implementors. The initial
implication was that implementing REs should be quick and easy to do,
because the principles are well understoof and there is existing mature code
out there. Whether that's true or not, if implementors can't (or won't) use
that code, it's all for naught.

CSS desperately needs to stabilize right now. At the moment, there is not
even a clear cut "minimum profile" supported across popular browsers that
Web authors can use. I thought the notion of CSS2 being primarily tailored
to clarifying CSS1 was a Good Thing. Now, stop fiddling with it. Web authors
desperately need that minimum profile. CSS2--or a clearly-defined subset
thereof--stands a good chance of being adequate to serve that purpose.
Please don't blow this. If CSS2 misses the boat here, CSS could very well
continue to lack credibility as a robust platform for some time to come.

Braden

Received on Wednesday, 11 March 1998 19:14:56 UTC