- From: Chris Wilson <cwilso@MICROSOFT.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 17:37:59 -0800
- To: "'Braden N. McDaniel'" <braden@shadow.net>, Ian Hickson <exxieh@bath.ac.uk>, wmperry@aventail.com, Bert Bos <Bert.Bos@sophia.inria.fr>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
Put me in the "against" group for the near future. It is unlikely that this is totally trivial to implement, and as neat as I may think it is, more power in the selector syntax is not near the top of the list of requests I've heard. I agree very strongly with Braden's comments on minimum profiles, except I personally think CSS2 is WAY beyond the minimum profile. CSS1 is probably a much better target, plus CSS Positioning. CSS2 is huge, from an implementation standpoint, and has many complex features. -Chris Wilson > -----Original Message----- > From: Braden N. McDaniel [SMTP:braden@shadow.net] > Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 1998 4:08 PM > To: Ian Hickson; wmperry@aventail.com; Bert Bos > Cc: www-style@w3.org > Subject: RE: OPINIONS WANTED: regexps in CSS? > >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. >... >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 20:38:29 UTC