- From: Dave J Woolley <david.woolley@bts.co.uk>
- Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 18:49:38 -0000
- To: "'www-style@w3.org'" <www-style@w3.org>
> From: firespring [SMTP:firespring@nfx.net] > > From this one lone author's point of view, yes. But since CSS is becoming > bloatware anyway, apparently more embedded inconsistency makes no > difference > [DJW:] This is the normal natural history of a standard: complex, all purpose, difficult to learn and implement software --> Lean and mean innovation --> Popularity --> Standardisation --> complex, all purpose difficult to learn and implement software. --> ? To some extent one can add expensive to the start and end points, but there are some caveats in this case. > list-lurker out here in the real world (i.e., the world that has been > > has gone WAY beyond trying to separate style from content and is instead > trying to develop a new UA-based graphics language. Sad. [DJW:] Unfortunately, the real world doesn't care for medium independence or separaration of form from content. They want a powerful and predictable graphics language for which they can rely on their being an interpreter pre-installed on nearly every desktop computer sold. Short term PDF and medium term SVG probably better reflect what they want to do (although SVG is not self contained) except that they are not guaranteed to be pre-installed. [DJW:] PS Your email is still broken: " 550 <david.woolley@bts.co.uk>... We don't accept mail from spammers" After you emailed me for details last time (how did you expect me to reply?) I posted a URL containing the full bounces. I think you may be blacklisting all of .co.uk. -- --------------------------- DISCLAIMER --------------------------------- Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of BTS.
Received on Friday, 9 March 2001 13:49:51 UTC