- From: Afternoon <afternoon@uk2.net>
- Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 17:30:50 +0100
- To: www-style@w3.org
> The benefits would be null until at least 2005, since the majority of > the > market share would be using a browser that didn't support it and for > which the next planned release is 2005. Since there is already a way > to do > it, why would authors use the way that didn't work? If this is a concern for the WG, why not pack up now and come back in 2005? Other browsers will happen and they will be relevant, other innovations will occur in CSS and they will be more relevant. This is maybe a reason not to change CSS , but it's not a reason to block this particular addition. > Anyway, my point was that the 'intrinsic' keyword (or whatever it is > called, assuming it is introduced) will presumably be very well > defined, > whereas currently "shrink wrap" is not. I'm pretty sure the intent is the same and I will stop using the phrase "shrink wrap" and use "intrinsic" instead. Thanks for your advice on this. Ben (q) Ben Godfrey? (a) Web Developer and Designer See http://aftnn.org/ for details
Received on Friday, 4 July 2003 12:30:57 UTC