- From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 02:50:12 +0000
- To: koba Mobile2 <koba@antenna.co.jp>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, "howcome@opera.com" <howcome@opera.com>
> From: www-style-request@w3.org [mailto:www-style-request@w3.org] On > Behalf Of koba Mobile2 > Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 4:56 PM > To: www-style@w3.org; howcome@opera.com > Subject: Re: [css3-writing-modes] a third option for implementing > logical properties > > Hakon > > > Implementation cost is one metric, but no the only one. For one, > > there's also a memory cost. I presume you have implemented this so > that > > the logical propertie cascade and inherit separately? on a per- > element > > basis? And cannot be resolved until you know the computed value for > > 'writing-mode'? If so, the memory use will be significant: ~35 > > property values for every element. > > The requests from end users or market is more important than > any implementation cost or memory cost. > > Your opinion is an excuse from an incompetent implementor. I do not think this kind of language is necessary or helpful. I suggest instead to ask Håkon why memory is such a concern for him. I suspect it has to do with Opera shipping millions of browsers on phones that are far more constrained than the first-generation iPhone, never mind a modern PC. More detailed and concrete background data on these constraints would be interesting though.
Received on Tuesday, 26 October 2010 02:50:52 UTC