Jump to menu

Vote down?

  1. Malarkey

    (From your last example) “Now if only the CSS working group could pull their fingers out and come to some kind of consensus as I really don’t want to have to wait another 5 years before we can start doing this on our sites.”

    One of the fascinating things about seeing the CSS WG in action is the huge amount of ground they need to cover to include (for example) internationalisation concerns. Their work is about far more than giving us designers and developers what we need. And therein lies the problem.

    The WG has published its timetable/priority list, but their idea of the top priorities probably don’t agree with ours. How are they to know what we feel are priorities? Sure there are the various mailing lists, but reading those for even the shortest time is better than an evening with John Major at sending you straight to sleep. What the process needs from designers is not an extended discussion about the finest details of the proposed specifications, but a clear message of what we want to work and how; with clear visual examples that everybody can understand.

    So the problem lies not only with the WG and the browser makers, but with us too. If we don’t tell them how and why we need these tools to work (and quickly) then we may well be sitting here in five years lashing together solutions in JavaScript.