- From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2015 16:51:57 -0700
- To: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
> On Jun 13, 2015, at 5:17 AM, Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net> wrote: > > Realistically though, advice in a spec can only do so much against people shooting themselves in the foot. That's as it should be. People don't always have the same priorities as we do, and should have the freedom to do things we might think are stupid and have advised against (even things that annoy the hell out of me if I have to use their page). They often have reasons that are important to them, and might find other ways to achieve them even if we eliminated this otherwise useful CSS feature. The public will decide if it wants to try to use that site in spite of its possible UX nightmare. > I do not really see any way to modify the feature to block or limit abuse while keeping it working for the intended use cases. I've discussed this with Hixie, and he didn't see a better approach either (HTML semantics are not sufficient to tell good uses from bad ones). > > Does anyone have a smart idea on how to improve this? > > If not, do we prefer to live with this risk, I'd say yes. > or should we give up on this feature entirely? Note that I am not interested in dropping it from the spec if it remains in implementations.
Received on Saturday, 13 June 2015 23:52:27 UTC