Re: OT (browser standards)
2005-02-21 19:46:11
Mukul Gandhi wrote:
I was suggesting this sort of activity only.. This
page very well puts the need..
http://webstandards.org/about/
But this seems an unofficial body.. Its just like you
and me expressing our opinion!
you do realize that the w3c is just an opinion, don't you?
best,
-Rob
In this site, there is a page
http://webstandards.org/act/bug/ , where we can report
bugs to browser vendors.. But that mail would go to
Microsoft, Mozilla or Opera.. Its just like, when I
get an error on IE, an error page pops up saying
"report this problem to Microsoft.." .
What we need is, that W3C starts such activity, and
sets a similar kind of site... After collecting
feedbacks fom users, W3C can submit the list to
vendors.. If they can ensure enforcement, it'll be
great! But thats not possible, I think, as W3C can
only recommend standards, but cannot enforce them..
Regards,
Mukul
--- Robert Koberg <rob(_at_)koberg(_dot_)com> wrote:
Have you seen:
http://webstandards.org/
?
best,
-Rob
Mukul Gandhi wrote:
Hi David,
The new standard errort you are refering
(http://www.whatwg.org/) seems to aim to
standardize
new widgets like RTF controls, menus and toolbars
etc..
Its a nice effort..
But we already have lot of standards like HTTP
1.1,
HTML 4, XML 1.0, XSLT 1.0, SSL 3.0 etc.. First,
implementation of these should be uniform acrosss
browsers..
I feel, many of the specs implemented are uniform
across major browsers(I would say 65%). Probably,
W3C
should make a list of things which are not
uniform(studying themself, and by taking user
feedbacks) and submit that list to MS, Mozilla,
Opera
to be implemented! MS can release patches for IE,
as
it practices today. I am not sure, whether W3C
charter
permits this activity.. Probably yes.. It will
surely
benifit users..
Regards,
Mukul
--- David Carlisle <davidc(_at_)nag(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk> wrote:
The "Web Browser Framework standard" could
include
something like following list as minimum set of
features that should be same(including spec
versions
like HTTP 1.1, XSLT 1.0 etc) across all browsers
-
the chance of getting xslt in a minimum agreed
set
of features is
I would say zero. Opera, Safari and my mobile
phone
don't do xslt and I
don't see any sign of them doing so in the
foreseeable future.
If you want to see what one subset of browser
implementors thinks is core
browse around
http://www.whatwg.org/
David
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/
or e-mail: <mailto:xsl-list-unsubscribe(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
--~--
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- Re: dynamic node access, (continued)
- Re: dynamic node access, David Carlisle
- Re: dynamic node access, RQamar
- Re: dynamic node access, David Carlisle
- OT (browser standards), Mukul Gandhi
- Re: OT (browser standards), António Mota
- Re: OT (browser standards), JBryant
- Re: OT (browser standards), David Carlisle
- Re: OT (browser standards), Mukul Gandhi
- Re: OT (browser standards), Robert Koberg
- Re: OT (browser standards), Mukul Gandhi
- Re: OT (browser standards),
Robert Koberg <=
- Re: OT (browser standards), Mukul Gandhi
- Re: dynamic node access, RQamar
- Re: dynamic node access, David Carlisle
- Re: dynamic node access, RQamar
|
|
|