Hello Don
On 18-Jun-01, you wrote:
>
> On 18-Jun-01, Matt Sealey wrote:
>
>> I'd rather have a fully (or nearly fully) HTML compliant and
>> Javascript compliant browser before starting to add CSS - although at
>> this stage some simple CSS parsing would be *very* useful (for
>> instance taking notice of font colours and background colours for
>> those badly written sites, and possibly absolute positioning of
>> elements for sites like http://www.espn.com), but this is AFAIR quite
>> far down the line..
>
> If we don't get a full implementation of HTML now, the missing bits
> could be missing forever.
Not really, the elements that are missing really are trivial: a lot of the
work to be done now is simply to get the browser acting like something
like IE does - that means, if you had the same fonts and pixel sizings
everywhere, then they'd look identical. The table layouter is practically
this way already.
> HTML first, please. Then JS. Then CSS.
HTML and JS come hand in hand. CSS and JS then so: you can't add
them as discrete elements. But I would hope to have most of HTML
(barring some elements not missable like <marquee> or <bgsound>)
implemented, and a neat enough (and mostly JS1.3 compliant) JS
implementation done before any work on CSS was started. That
said - it isn't far off now (a cursory glance shows that a few
trivial functions from a few classes are missing, then some of the
lesser used Javascript properties and methods (.source, .toSource,
.prototype). As for HTML.. it's mainly list support.
Thanks
--
Matt Sealey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Website http://www.kittycat.co.uk
_____________________________________________________________________
Voyager Mailing List - http://v3.vapor.com/
Voyager FAQ....: http://faq.vapor.com/voyager/
Listserver Help: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=HELP
Unsubscribe....: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=UNSUBSCRIBE
