- From: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
- Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 07:33:06 +0100 (BST)
- To: www-style@w3.org
> situation arose. At what point did CSS become so complicated that it > requires the originators to explain themselves so laboriously and, more > relevantly, is this situation consistent with the goals of the W3C? The Once you try to write up a complete and self consistent description. Typical vendor documentation leaves a lot of the behaviour of an interface unspecified, without stating that it is unspecified. Part of a standards bodies job is to make the behaviour very precise or make implementation choices explicit. That has the effect of producing legalistic documents and also forces one to realise that things that might, at first sight, look attractive, lead to contradictions. However, those documents are really valuable for the technician as they avoid the need to try out on every platform and the fear that an implementation choice may change in the next version because the vendor never realised that people where relying on it. I have, for example, found that the X/open Unix man pages are much more useful than the SCO man pages because they do describe the boundary conditions properly.
Received on Friday, 4 July 2003 02:52:23 UTC