- From: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 13:42:55 +0100
- To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Peter Sorotokin <psorotok@adobe.com>, www-svg@w3.org
Also sprach Chris Lilley:
> >> We have fill, stroke, filter, etc., why suddenly we cannot have overlay?
>
> IH> 'filter' in particular is a problem. It clashes with a property that
> IH> was in an older draft of CSS2, and which was implemented by IE.
>
> This is sheer historical revisionism. I was there, and you were not.
Chris, your language is unnecessarily aggressive in this and previous
messages (to www-css-wg). You are right, you were there. But this is
not a good way to convey experiences from the past and achieve
consensus in the future.
As I'm sure you recall, I very much resisted the "filter" property
when it was proposed. I don't think it belongs in CSS. However, when
you search for "filter property" in Google what you get is MSFT. If
you search for "filter property CSS" you get bunches of pointers to
MS' stuff.
And the property is documented in Brian Wilson's extensive description
of properties:
http://www.blooberry.com/indexdot/css/properties/dynamic/filter.htm
This doesn't mean it's a standard in any way, but disregarding it
isn't an option either.
> IH> It basically means that IE will never be able to implement SVG in
> IH> HTML. (A lot of legacy content uses the 'filter' property.)
>
> Which is entirely the CSS WG fault for not providing a standard
> alternative in a timely manner.
I disagree, you can't blame the CSS WG for MSFT not supporting SVG.
The functionaly provided by "filter" is outside the domain of CSS the
WG has no obligation to provide an alternative.
-h&kon
Håkon Wium Lie CTO °þe®ª
howcome@opera.com http://people.opera.com/howcome
Received on Wednesday, 10 November 2004 12:43:44 UTC