[whatwg] Default (informal) Style Sheet
st at isoc.nl
Thu Apr 5 17:22:52 PDT 2007
At 09:54 +0200 UTC, on 2007-04-02, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 09:59:50 +0200, Sander Tekelenburg <st at isoc.nl> wrote:
>> Surely we're not trying to ensure that a Web page
>> is presented the same in every browsing environment? What would be the
>> use of that?
> That's what people expect from us (browser vendors).
And just because they expect it from you, does that mean you (browser
vendors), let alone 'all of us', should give them that?
> So yes, that's what we're trying to ensure.
Leaving aside for a moment whether it would be a good idea at all, I don't
see how UA authors *can* ensure this. For example, I don't see how a site can
look the same on a 21" desktop system, and a 3" portable one *and still be
usable*. Add to that the possibility of a User Style Sheet, which means
authors *cannot* be ensured that something will be presented this way or
that. If in spite of that reality the spec say that x must be presented y,
then we'd be telling Web authors they can rely on something they in reality
cannot rely on. In practice, this can only result in yet more sites that are
only usable to users willing to hand control over to the site's author --
even more sites that require a windows size of x, font-size of y, etc. The
more specific the HTML spec says how x must be presented, the more trouble
users will have configuring their UA to present content the way that is
comfortable to *them*.
Is HTML5 to accomodate authors, or users?
> Not all authors will use a 'CSS zapper' (whatever it is).
If that's a question, I linked to what it is in my first message in this
> They will still
> expect the same results across user agents.
Why should HTML5 fulfill unreasonable expectations from Web authors?
The Web Repair Initiative: <http://webrepair.org/>
More information about the whatwg