Re: Adding CSS to Composer : request for comments

[Joe Francis]

>> I keep being told that the world implied by number 2) above is coming,
>> so we better be able to support it.  But I don't understand *why* it's
>> coming.  And I'm not sure I believe that it *is* coming.  [JF]

> It is coming for sure. It is coming because more than 50% of american
> citizens have internet access but only some hundreds of people are able
> to answer to that simple question : what is the shortest valid html4
> document ?   [DG]

Hi Daniel!  So let me spell out my confusion a little more.  I agree 
with you that people want something (roughly) wysiwyg for things like 
mail and chat, and I agree that most of us aren't html and css experts, 
and I even agree that the html freight train can't be stopped anytime 
soon so we are going to have to deal with it in these clients.  Where I 
have my doubts is that the css freight train can't be stopped.  

Why can't we just continue to abuse html (without css) for these rich 
text clients?  It's actually a lot easier to get it right, to get 
smaller implementations, to get faster implementations, and to get 
backwards compatibility.  What I don't understand is what css buys us in 
this kind of world.  

The real stregths of CSS are revealed in static structured documents.  
But the interesting things happening in the editor space are for 
non-static, unstructured documents.

-- 
jfrancis         .com      -and-     floppymoose         .net
        @netscape                               @netscape