Re: [css-d] how hard would it be...
Thanks Philippe,It was a hypothetical question aimed at understanding why the spec or browser manufacturers does not include this. I think that might not have been clear in my original email judging by some of the other responses.I'm certainly not about to try advocating it - what a waste of energy that would be! I was just looking for the reasons that make it problematic. __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] how hard would it be...
My take on this issue having traveled throughout Europe and Middle East and "looking" at the American policies from a different perspective is the extended 'American Pride'. Same as, why don't we use the International accepted metric system? Yes there would be an initial cost, but why continue manufacturing using the "other" system? I believe the open source in time will remedy this situation. Monopoly of proprietary products will eventually dissolve and become a chapter in the annals of IT history. Felix Diaz On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:23 AM, Christian Hanvey wrote: > > How difficult would it be for browser manufacturer's to create their CSS > parsers so that they could also accept the international spelling of CSS > properties eg color + colourcenter + centregrey + gray > It seems to me like it really would not be that difficult - so why is it > not this way? It would certainly have saved me some time debugging in my > early days!I imagine there is a good reason why not, but wanted to hear if > anyone actually knows the reason. > I could not find anything in the spec referring as to why we only use the > American spelling rather than International spelling. > Cheers! > __ > css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] > http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d > List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ > List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html > Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/ > -- Felix __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] how hard would it be...
On 04/10/2012 02:46 PM, Philippe Wittenbergh wrote: On Apr 10, 2012, at 9:23 PM, Christian Hanvey wrote: How difficult would it be for browser manufacturer's to create their CSS parsers so that they could also accept the international spelling of CSS properties eg color + colourcenter + centregrey + gray It seems to me like it really would not be that difficult - so why is it not this way? It would certainly have saved me some time debugging in my early days!I imagine there is a good reason why not, but wanted to hear if anyone actually knows the reason. Historically, US English has always been the normative language for W3C specifications. Allowing an additional, different spelling in parallel would significantly increase the complexity of writing such specs. Similarly, for browsers, having to implement -and maintain!- such aliasing mechanism wouldn't come cheap. But I agree with you. Colour ftw! After 10+ years I still spell it wrong. (I've always been of the opinion that the W3C specs should have been written en Français) I could not find anything in the spec referring as to why we only use the American spelling rather than International spelling. I don't think it is referenced normatively. Best place to ask is the CSS WG’s www-style mailing list, though. In fact, it has been discussed earlier, in the thread starting at [1], and in particular Tankek Çelik's response at [2]. HTH Ms2ger [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Feb/0475.html [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Feb/0518.html __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] how hard would it be...
On Apr 10, 2012, at 9:23 PM, Christian Hanvey wrote: > How difficult would it be for browser manufacturer's to create their CSS > parsers so that they could also accept the international spelling of CSS > properties eg color + colourcenter + centregrey + gray > It seems to me like it really would not be that difficult - so why is it not > this way? It would certainly have saved me some time debugging in my early > days!I imagine there is a good reason why not, but wanted to hear if anyone > actually knows the reason. Historically, US English has always been the normative language for W3C specifications. Allowing an additional, different spelling in parallel would significantly increase the complexity of writing such specs. Similarly, for browsers, having to implement -and maintain!- such aliasing mechanism wouldn't come cheap. But I agree with you. Colour ftw! After 10+ years I still spell it wrong. (I've always been of the opinion that the W3C specs should have been written en Français) > I could not find anything in the spec referring as to why we only use the > American spelling rather than International spelling. I don't think it is referenced normatively. Best place to ask is the CSS WG’s www-style mailing list, though. Philippe -- Philippe Wittenbergh http://l-c-n.com/ __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
[css-d] how hard would it be...
How difficult would it be for browser manufacturer's to create their CSS parsers so that they could also accept the international spelling of CSS properties eg color + colourcenter + centregrey + gray It seems to me like it really would not be that difficult - so why is it not this way? It would certainly have saved me some time debugging in my early days!I imagine there is a good reason why not, but wanted to hear if anyone actually knows the reason. I could not find anything in the spec referring as to why we only use the American spelling rather than International spelling. Cheers! __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
