MozillaZine

Weekend Discussion

Friday March 3rd, 2000

This weekend's discussion: What keeps you interested in Mozilla, and what expectations do you have?

Just click the responses link below to enter the forum. Let us know what you think!


#123 Re: Not as simple as it seems...

by sacolcor

Tuesday March 7th, 2000 12:42 PM

You are replying to this message

From your post, I think I can narrow our points of disagreement down to three:

1) You feel that the current situation in web design, where authors need to code seperate implementations for every browser, isn't a problem, or at least is preferable to accepting a single standard for the language unless that standard is developed by internet-wide consensus.

2) You feel that coding a browser to accept multiple interpretations of an HTML document is not unreasonably difficult, and should have been done by Mozilla.

3) You feel that the only acceptable standard is one reached by consensus across the entire internet. Because the W3C does not seek this consensus, it should not be listened to.

If I've misunderstood your position, please correct me. Now, as to my response:

1) You may feel this way, but every professional web developer I've spoken with disagrees. Web designers are wasting vast amounts of time dealing with this problem...it /has/ to go away. Do you do much cross-browser web design? How have you been coding your web sites, so as not to be affected by this issue?

2) If you think you can do it, by all means gather others who feel similarly and implement it...I'm sure the team would be interested in a NS4.7 (and/or an IE) compatibility module, if it seemed to be a solid piece of 3rd party code. I've decided it isn't something I'd want to spend time on, and Netscape seems to have made the same call. If you're not a programmer, please don't try to assert that it isn't excessively complex, or won't impose serious costs in terms of resource use.

3) In my last post, I listed ways that you could have your voice heard in the W3C design process. You neither reposted nor responded to these ways. This makes your position on the W3C begin to sound dogmatic, rather than reasoned. Your response:

"The extremely delayed release of Netscape is "justified" by the determination to make it right. Why should things be different for a Web "standard"?"

would have the W3C putting out a new standard so infrequently as to effectively not exist. The standards should be published /prior/ to the browser makers doing an implementation; otherwise you create incompatibilities that are nobody's friend. This requires a faster pace than a pure consensus approach would allow.