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!


#136 Episode I

by Tanyel <tanyel@straightblack.com>

Friday March 10th, 2000 6:41 PM

You are replying to this message

"I think the W3C is adding to the [browser incompatibility] problem by creating yet another variation."

More specifically, they are adding to the problem by creating a variation that is absolutely incompatible with previous versions, even when the incompatibilities are not necessary.

"I think everybody [who has something to say] should be listened to [and given a vote in the standards design process]."

I said the "standards body" should have a system similar to Bugzilla.

"This position needs to provide a viable alternative in order to be taken seriously; otherwise it is a pointless gripe."

The "viable alternative" would be "standards" that do not unnecessarily invalidate older conventions.

"Browser makers should maintain backward compatibility with their previous implementations"

I happen to think a good way for Netscape to lose the five developers, who still make pages for Navigator, is to create a situation in which all of their work is rendered useless, and then label the situation as an effort that is supposed to make their work easier.

"and also support the standard once it gets approved"

Yes, but I do not think the W3C recommendation should be the "standard". This means I think that either the W3C should have produced different recommendations or Mozilla should have followed a different organization.

"The W3C should take an open vote on each feature of the standard before finalizing it."

I think a process should have been used similar to the one Bugzilla uses.

"The people whose primary job is making web browsers don't seem to agree with you."

That does not mean I am wrong.

"If you have a reason that we should trust your judgement on the matter rather than theirs, please provide it."

This is a "borderline" personal attack, possibly one of those "pointless gripes" you mentioned. If you want me to consider proving myself then I need more information. For instance, who are the people you suggest have superior judgement to me? What reason is there to trust these people&#8217;s judgement? What have they accomplished? What makes you think this question is relevant?

"Otherwise, assertions like these come across as na´ve"

I think assuming a person's beliefs are wrong while she has, thus far, provided competent reasons for her beliefs, is a "na´ve" and blind action.

"as though a consumer was telling an auto engineer that he wants a car that gets 250 mpg, while the auto engineer keeps telling him that he could build the car, but it would take ten years, cost $2,000,000 and couldn't carry anything larger than a small child"

I could have some fun with this. Tell me what each element of this analogy symbolizes. If this analogy assumes I am only a consumer, it is not fair. However, I do not expect fairness.

"the number of people who truly understand the design issues will be vastly exceeded by the number of people who have only a superficial grasp of the problems involved"

If the people, who produced the "standard", produced a faulty "standard", then maybe they do not truly understand the design issues. Maybe they promote themselves as experts and lead "na´ve" followers into traps that will ruin them.

"You would probably add a few hundred insightful views, and several thousand well-meaning but ill-conceived ideas that would then be voted into the standard by people who don't know enough to recognize the problems they will cause."

I said the process should be like Bugzilla. Have people in Bugzilla voted many problems into Mozilla that are going to lead significant problems? Did Mozilla&#8217;s compatibility problems come from the general public, or the group of "experts" at the W3C?

I read the entire message you typed.

"don't begrudge the W3C the money it collects; I'm sure it takes a lot of money to keep the w3c.org website running"

I suspect I could maintain a similar site for $30 per month plus the cost of registering a domain name. I shall further examine this issue.