- From: Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 22:59:21 +0200
- To: www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
Jonathan Chetwynd wrote: > James, Bert and Doug, > > my take is a fourth way, one not as yet subscribed to by any W3WG > > creating at least one version of each spec that provides for an > easy-to-use AT for the average joe. > no not one mediated by a gynormous hyped corporation, just an average joe. > > rather than a catchall for any developers' fantasy. > iirc html as originally developed was reasonably successful in this > respect, even though the tool aspect is outstanding a decade later.... Absolutely. Both HTML and CSS were designed to be simple and useful, to make a lot of information a lot more accessible, but *not* to be the single solution for all kinds of information that people might want to communicate. They are in a way a victim of their own success. So many people know and like them, that they want to extend them just a little to include their favorite applications. If everybody gets their extensions, we'll end up with a system that is far from simple and that could be useful, but isn't usable. Saying "no" is difficult, but necessary. Rather than making a single monstrously big language, we design a modular architecture, in which CSS, HTML, SVG, PNG, XSL, SMIL and others complement each other and do what they are good at. Bert -- Bert Bos ( W 3 C ) http://www.w3.org/ http://www.w3.org/people/bos W3C/ERCIM bert@w3.org 2004 Rt des Lucioles / BP 93 +33 (0)4 92 38 76 92 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Wednesday, 16 July 2008 21:00:11 UTC