[whatwg] A Quick Greeting and Some Comments

[Kai Hendry]

On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 08:54:55AM -0700, Kurt Cagle wrote:
> 1) My gut reaction when I hear people talking about using IE6 as a  
> baseline model for development is to cringe. IE6 represents an endpoint  
> technology, reflecting standards that are now a couple of years out of  
> date, and employing specific capabilities that raise some serious security  

IE6 is what everyone uses. We have to use it as a baseline model. 

"The truth is that the real Web, the Web that authors write for, is the
Windows IE6 Web."
http://ln.hixie.ch/?start=1086387609&count=1

> same adoption curve that "bleeding edge" tech has.  As I see it WHAT is  
> fairly conservative in that it recommends incremental changes into the  
> browser environments rather than wholesale ripping out of core pieces of  
> functionality. Yet if the same problems persist with the newer model as  
> does with the older one, have you necessary made the problem any easier,  
> or have you simply created more incompatibilities between systems?

With mobile phones nowadays they generally can *just* about do XHTML
Basic. That means that if we build from XHTML there will always be
something for those devices to fall back on (compatibility). If you come
up with an new web application framework then you are going to blow
those devices out the water (incompatibility).

> 5) I have written behaviors for Microsoft itself; it was cool technology  
> back in 1999. Today, I typically implement those behaviors using external  

What are you working on now in Microsoft? :)

> 6) Bundled behaviors of this form also bypass the CSS mechanism that I  
> find so cumbersome when dealing with behaviors in IE. I've written several  
> books on CSS; it is an antiquated technology that is difficult to extend  
> into XML without a huge amount of work, and it is rapidly being deprecated  

I find it works better than ever with XML.

> in most new web browser technologies in favor of some form of NON-STANDARD  
> styling mechanism. This to me seems to be the REAL hole within the W3C  

What non-standard styling mechanism?

> universe, and it shows up everywhere; there is no reason when dealing with  
> XML that we should be accessing a non-XML text file that defines in a  
> complex parsing manner a limited set of stylistic attributes that then  
> rely upon a difficult to use cascading model. Binding behaviors into the  
> model seems to me the height of poor planning.

Don't know much about this case. Do you have a test case? URI? Seems a
little bizarre.

> 7) Don't discount SVG. I think that SVG is sitting just on or slightly  
> past its inflection point; from my vantage point studying the technology,  
> this year will see it become pervasive everywhere EXCEPT within Internet  
> Explorer, either directly or through third party extensions. If you treat  

Everyone will be using it, except everyone eh?

> Okay, I've probably gone on longer than I should (and will probably be  
> permanently banned from this mailing list as a consequence) but I just  
> wanted to stress that a back to basics movement is fine so long as people  
> understand that such basics should be used as a guideline, not a  
> regressive step. Anyway, I'm looking forward to the discussions on this  
> group.

Banned? I have never heard of a person being banned from an open mailing
list, unless perhaps that person spammed. I like to think as
technologists we are all able to filter out (and in) email accordingly.

There is a lot of points in your mail. If you want people to address
your points better consider splitting your email.

Best wishes,