Re: Excluding declarations from the cascade

On Mon, 20 Aug 2001, Jan Roland Eriksson wrote:
>
> Why is it so totally impossible to try to keep CSS simple?

Not impossible, but hard. Web authors are demanding lots of new features
(witness comments on this very list for instance) and trying to add them
to CSS without breaking the fundamental model is not easy.


> Why is it required that CSS must be "massaged" over and over again into
> some new spec,

It isn't required. Where did you get the impression that it was?


> when we are all still suffering from two specs that, none of them,
> have been implemented correctly anywhere?

People are working on this day in day out. Look at Netscape 6.1, it comes
closer than ever to a full CSS1 implementation. Win IE6 is much better
than Win IE5.5 (although it still lags way behind the other browsers).


> Why was there never an attempt made to create a CSS2.1 which could have
> formed a well discussed, pretty much error free, good and reliable,
> foundation for whatever future that CSS might have needed.

Because we are still finding errors on a weekly basis in CSS2. Once CSS2's
errata stops growing, then it is likely that a new edition will be
published, just as happened with CSS1.


> CSS3 stinks, am I the only one to think in those terms?

Do you have any explicltly constructive criticism? For example, look at
the CSS3 Selectors last call document; do you have any specific complaints
that haven't been raised? (Note that all the comments that have been
raised have been answered -- all known open issues bar one are resolved
and you will be able to see the replies when the Selectors module goes to
CR. The remaining issue is with development of the test suite.)

We (the working group) can work with specific comments. "It stinks"
doesn't really help us.

-- 
Ian Hickson                                     )\     _. - ._.)       fL
                                               /. `- '  (  `--'
                                               `- , ) -  > ) \
irc.mozilla.org:Hixie _________________________  (.' \) (.' -' __________

Received on Wednesday, 29 August 2001 17:44:38 UTC