Shining Arcanine wrote:
Dave Massy asks you to stop yet you continue to cause a disturbance in this thread...
I asked you all to show some respect, I did not ask anyone to stop the conversation. As I said before there are lots of valid viewpoints being expressed here and it's great to see the debate. You are all welcome to continue expressing your viewpoints but I think it would be a shame if this forum deteriorated to the level of some others. It may be worth avoiding the topics of religion and politics but if there's something people have to say that is relevant to this area then let's hear it.
Keskos is actually bringing up some valuable points that reflect some of the experience I have had when dealing with standards. While I don't agree with everything being said here Keskos is correct to point out that there are some issues with standards. It's very easy to take an idealistic approach when it comes to standards. It's worth remembering that we do not live in an ideal world, but that should not stop us from reaching for those ideals! The fact that CSS2 is flawed and being replaced with CSS2.1 demonstrates that errors are made and we do not live in an ideal world. I believe it is to the W3C's credit that CSS2.1 is moving forward as an implementable set of functionality.
At Microsoft we value the work of standards bodies and we understand the value of a common framework for developers. We have already said that we understand the issues that developers are facing and that Internet Explorer has fallen behind in support of some recommendations. At this time we can't say definitively when and how we might address this as I do not want to make any statement until we are sure we can deliver.
It does seem that this debate is a little tired at the moment but that does not mean that each viewpoint is not valuable. Sometimes it is possible to agree to disagree so we can move on to a different topic
When I said "stop" I should have specified that I was referring to his rudeness.
Keskos, since it seems that we are both in agreement and at the same time in disagreement over the same exact thing, I think that we would actually get something done if I replied to you in more detail than I normally do.
sorry if my comments seemed to be disrespectful to you.
Keskos wrote:However I stand up with what I said.
Keskos wrote:I think we should talk more about technical issues rather than who is more moral or who is more cheering for the W3C etc...
I never said that we shouldn't.
Keskos wrote:Let's be to the point, let's discuss the real issues, rather than saying things like "we will not be here if there is no standards".
I agree with your first clause and your second clause but your 3rd clause I find to be contradictory as we need a specification that both web programmers and browser programmers can code to. Do you think we should attempt getting by without one?
Keskos wrote:I don't think anybody is disputing the importance of standards, but really it is lame to misuse the word standards.
Again, I don't disagree. However I think I should say that you did not specify what you mean by "misuse" so our definitions of that word could be two entirely different things.
Keskos wrote:I appreciate that you are really concerned about standards, and it is a very good thing to have people like you (especially the fact that you are doing this not to bash Microsoft), but I think we shouldn't go over the board.
Keskos wrote:Yeah, let's put pressure on IE team to address some of the important concerns we have, but let's be reasonable in our demands so we can spend more time on really important issues, rather than spending time who is the best cheerleader for "standards".
I agree with everything but your last cause for one reason. I want there to be a specification that both browser makers and web designers can code to in order to ensure backwards and forwards compatibility. And when I say that, I do not mean that other priorities should be thrown away for that (as you might think). I think that both can co-exist and I also think that having both (in a good way) will ensure superior code.
Keskos wrote:Also let's stop saying we can't criticize W3C, yes we can.
I never said we couldn't and I agree that we can.
I think that things would be more productive here if I took the time to tell you that until a few days ago I had refused to recognize CSS2.1 as an official CSS specification. I was upset that the members of the W3C had broken backwards compatibility as their CSS specifications were supposed to always build on each other, not replace each other. A few days ago I realized that a bright future for the internet would require everyone to recognize CSS2.1 as Microsoft had recognized it. I recognized CSS 2.1 because recognizing CSS 2.1 would help the future more than fragmenting the CSS specification by not recognizing it. Even with 1 instance of broken backwards compatibility (luckily it didn't change much) I can say with confidence that the future will be better with a specification to code for than a future without a specification.
Keskos wrote:We can also raise issues with standards itself.
I encourage you to. I'm not sure how to get in touch with the W3C directly so it might be more productive if we did it indirectly, through its members such as Microsoft which is very willing to listen.
Keskos wrote:We have that freedom.
Keskos wrote:Maybe that way we can fix problems, maybe we can provide feedback back to W3C.
I never said that we should not. I think feedback is very important.
Keskos wrote:It is important not to have an environment where everybody feel that they have to be zealot to say something.
If you are referring to me, I am not being a Zealot, I am stating what needs to be done with the future of the internet lying in the balance of Microsoft's decision.
Keskos wrote:That kills the discussion environment and it is extremely important to make that channel open.
I never said that it wasn't important.