- From: Lea Verou <leaverou@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2012 20:06:23 +0200
- To: Matthew Wilcox <elvendil@gmail.com>
- CC: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, www-style@w3.org
On 19/2/12 19:49, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > I'm sure it has, and I don't expect anything to change with regard to > this - decisions have already been made and CSS has a history it's > going to maintain. I still don't like the result. > > I don't see CSS development to be sustainable in the long term without > the ability to author to a specified version. These "we can't do that > because it breaks backward compatibility" things will eventually be > one of the main causes for replacement technologies. > > I'm with Chris Epstein and co; CSS is the worst aspect of the web > medium: http://infrequently.org/2012/02/misdirection/ I think it would be more productive if someone compiled a list of all these things where almost everyone agrees they should be different, but we can't do it due to backwards compatibility reasons. Ideally with pointers to the relevant www-style discussions. This would be very useful as part of the csswg wiki too, for two reasons: a) It would give everyone a better sight of the big picture as to whether a version switch is really needed. b) It would be a place we could point newcomers to, in order to avoid discussing the same issues over and over again. Given Matt's passion, I think he would want to help with a draft version of that list and a CSS WG member could take it from there. -- Lea Verou (http://lea.verou.me | @LeaVerou)
Received on Sunday, 19 February 2012 18:06:57 UTC