Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
> Microsoft hijacks now web standards and the W3C: -m$ fonts?
I took the time to research this issue completely, and it seems this is
not uniquely a Microsoft problem.
The fact that Microsoft have so many non-standard methods for HTML (and
everything else) is undoubtedly a problem (for anyone not using their
software), but in this specific case they seem to be doing nothing more
than attempting compliance with one particular W3C standard [*], albeit
in a manner which might cause even more problems. Generally speaking,
there's no easy way for Microsoft to implement standards compliance
without completely breaking backwards compatibility, unless they further
add to the mess by retaining multiple standards support. It's this
complexity that the commentators seem to be complaining about.
However, as I suggested, it seems this is not uniquely a Microsoft
issue. The /real/ problem is the existence of /any/ vendor specific
extensions at /all/, since both Mozilla and Opera are guilty of exactly
the same thing.
The solution should be for /all/ browser vendors to stop using
proprietary standard extensions, and come to some consensus about which
methods need to be implemented - and exactly how to implement them, in a
manner that does not tie those standards to any specific browser, so the
W3C can once and for all remove all vendor-specific extensions from
Of course, /getting/ that cooperation from Microsoft is another thing,
since as far as they're concerned this disparity works in their favour.
| "The shepherd drives the wolf from the sheep's throat, for which
| the sheep thanks the shepherd as his liberator, while the wolf
| denounces him for the same act, as the destroyer of liberty.
| Plainly the sheep and the wolf are not agreed upon a definition of
| the word liberty; and precisely the same difference prevails today
| among human creatures." ~ Abraham Lincoln
Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 188.8.131.52-60.fc8
12:21:38 up 155 days, 19:04, 4 users, load average: 0.36, 0.14, 0.09