Hello and welcome to our community! Is this your first visit?
Register
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    Regular Coder
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    472
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mark Pilgrim: "Semantic obsolescence"


  • #2
    Senior Coder
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    near Oswestry
    Posts
    4,508
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    I sympathise, but not very much.

    The w3c is just people like you and me, at the end of the day, and they don't always get things right. But there's little point ranting when things don't go how you planned ... you just have to adjust.

    And actually much of what he moans about - how future proofing in the past didn't work for the present - is not largely down to the standards themselves, it's down to vendor-specific differences of interpretation, which are impossible to predict ... you just have to adjust.

    We can help him with his scripting in XHTML mode problems, if he drops by
    Last edited by brothercake; 02-21-2004 at 06:50 AM.
    "Why bother with accessibility? ... Because deep down you know that the web is attractive to people who aren't exactly like you." - Joe Clark

  • #3
    Master Coder
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Umeå, Sweden
    Posts
    5,575
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 83 Times in 74 Posts
    I see his point, and I know the problems he's facing. But I don't think he does the right thing. XHTML introduces scripting problems, true. Those scripting problems can in some cases not be solved, but in most cases they are easily solved. MIME type problems exist, true, but those aren't W3C created problems. The MIME type mechanisms have been in place in browsers since NSCA Mosaic, Internet Explorer being the single browser moving AWAY from MIME type mechanisms that are otherwise de facto as well as formal standards.

    What he definitely misses is that the standards are "lists" of what both browser makers and web developers should work towards supporting, and what you should be able to rely on browsers to handle if they claim support for a certain standard. That means that they are part of the past and the current, but most of all part of the future. XHTML2 will not gain especially much usage on the net until at least every modern browser supports most of it. It will not at all gain widespread usage if Internet Explorer or it's replacement doesn't add support for it. It is something for browser makers to develop towards, not something that you realistically can use right now. I don't think you will be able to use it in five years either. Possibly in ten years.
    liorean <[lio@wg]>
    Articles: RegEx evolt wsabstract , Named Arguments
    Useful Threads: JavaScript Docs & Refs, FAQ - HTML & CSS Docs, FAQ - XML Doc & Refs
    Moz: JavaScript DOM Interfaces MSDN: JScript DHTML KDE: KJS KHTML Opera: Standards

  • #4
    Regular Coder
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    472
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Well said guys. Thanks a lot for the responses.


  •  

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •