Tim Climis wrote:
The problem is not lack of standardization. The problem is that developers
want to use
properties that technically aren't part of the standard yet.
I respectfully disagree. The problem is not what the developers
/want/ us to do, but rather than there are far too many of
maj 10 2014 12:54 Philip Taylor :
> I respectfully disagree. The problem is not what the developers
> /want/ us to do, but rather than there are far too many of us
> who are only too eager to accede to their wishes. We are under no
> obligation whatsoever to do anything that a developer might w
MiB wrote:
maj 10 2014 12:54 Philip Taylor :
I prefer to wait until a specification becomes a formal
recommendation before adopting any part of it for production work.
Define formal.
"Formal" :
7.4.5 Publication of a W3C Recommendation
Document maturity level: Recommendation.
Announc
Howdy Tim,
~~~
Friday, May 9, 2014, 5:36:51 PM (USA 'Somewhere on-the-road time-zone'),
you wrote the message that appears below.
My reply appears here and/or interspersed within your message.
~~~
> There is standardization.
What, then, of the divergence between W3C and WHATWG?
G'Jim c):{-
--
GJim wrote:
What, then, of the divergence between W3C and WHATWG?
There is W3C, and there is everybody else. WHATWG is nothing
more than a member of "everybody else", no matter how great
its finite-but-unbounded sense of self-importance.
Philip Taylor
__
On Saturday, May 10, 2014 11:54:32 AM you wrote:
> Tim Climis wrote:
> > The problem is not lack of standardization. The problem is that
> > developers want to use properties that technically aren't part of the
> > standard yet.
>
> I respectfully disagree. The problem is not what the developers
On Saturday, May 10, 2014 08:57:36 AM GJim wrote:
> > There is standardization.
>
> What, then, of the divergence between W3C and WHATWG?
I'm unaware of a WHATWG CSS standard (and it appears that Google
also doesn't know about it, so I'm questioning its existence). I know
that there are comp
maj 10 2014 16:54 Tim Climis :
> but those are irrelevant to
> this thread.
How did standards enter into a discussion on the role of (CSS) preprocessors
anyway? Preprocessors are largely operationally independent of standards — you
may choose to support them or not as usual — so I feel the ro
Howdy Philip,
~~~
Saturday, May 10, 2014, 9:02:51 AM (USA 'Somewhere on-the-road time-zone'),
you wrote the message that appears below.
My reply appears here and/or interspersed within your message.
~~~
> GJim wrote:
>> What, then, of the divergence between W3C and WHATWG?
> There is W3C, and
Sorry for asking this again; there was an email where somebody gave some links
to groups where they get great help in LESS..IIRC, they were not lesscss.org;
got that one. I can't find the email with the links to the LESS help groups.
Anyone have those?
Thank you!
John
_
10 matches
Mail list logo
