- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 00:18:00 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@x-port.net>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Mark Birbeck wrote: > > Ah...I misunderstood you. When you said "ample evidence" I thought you > were referring to studies, reports, statistics...and I was saying that I > was happy to have my view changed on reading such material. But what you > meant was that in *your view*, authors are clueless, and you base this > on that fact that there are web pages out there that execute > inefficiently. Here's a study: http://code.google.com/webstats/index.html Take one example: writing a page with <table> markup is inefficient from the point of view of browser page load times. <table> is the 9th most often used element. Conclusion: authors make bad decisions. > So my point still stands; you can't be sure that authors cannot be > trusted with features that are denied them...since they don't actually > have those features available to them to use inefficiently! There are plenty of features that authors can use inefficiently. The fact that authors mis-use them is why Web browser vendors are reluctant to add *more* features that can be used inefficiently. If there were no such features already available, your point would stand, but this is not the case. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 22 August 2006 00:18:34 UTC