smorgan wrote: > This is exactly the double-standard I was trying to highlight, even > more succinctly stated. You are saying that being tolerant of people > doing the wrong thing discourages people from doing the wrong thing > when Firefox does it, but encourages people to do the wrong thing when > Camino does it.
I don't think the two are directly equivalent in that way - see the second point in my previous post. Because being tolerant of quirks in Firefox does encourage people to do the right thing with new pages - because we can then have a standards mode which they want to use, which gives consistent rendering across all browsers. However, being tolerant of bad sniffing doesn't encourage anyone to do the right thing. The flaw in the argument above is that one way of "doing the wrong thing" is not equivalent to the other way of "doing the wrong thing". > If people want to hold us to a double standard, then they will, and > I'm under no illusions that I'm going to convince everyone that that's > the case here. I just want to be very clear that I see it as such, > since I think that if Gervase is going to make sweeping assertions > about our beliefs in a public forum, our perspective should be clearly > stated. I am not making sweeping statements about your beliefs; I am merely pointing out that expressing the goodness of a principle while simultaneously acting against that principle is normally called (and I know it's an ugly word, and I didn't particularly want to use it in this discussion) hypocrisy. Perhaps "inconsistent", at least. Gerv _______________________________________________ dev-tech-layout mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-layout
