Like it or lump it, Mozilla's biggest problem is that their competition actually has out right now something that may be superior to most of what they are still building. Like it or lump it, IE is pretty slick.
Except that IE5 is still far from standards compliant, and tries to bite off more than it can chew, like all browsers previous to it. e.g., trying to implement CSS2 before you get CSS1 right, trying to do XSL before it's even a standard. It's more embrace-extend-corrupt, which is why Mozilla will be better, regardless of the "new feature set" hype.
No, not tech support. Service. This means more along the lines of implementation -- fitting a product in with other products/needs in a business setting.
Really, how many programmers are coding shrink-wrapped/commercial software? And how many more are working on custom implementations? Would this really change the software market that much? The software will still be needed. Someone will still find ways to make money off of it. It'll just be better software because it's open source.
I think this may depend on the implicit (well, not implicit with M3 - it's in res) UA-stylesheet. The cascade of preferences is, I believe:
Implicit UA style
HTML specified formatting (e.g. cellpadding=0)
User style
Author style
User-important style
I'm imagining that the HTML specs don't say that tables should inherit properties of parent tables, and M3 is interpreting this correctly, and applying the UA style to the child tables.
There really was no core of Mozilla. At least nothing version 5 would want to use. It was a tag-soup "parser" (gee, here's a - let's start making things bold). It's a miracle that they could tack on as much JS and CSS crap as they did. I'd imagine almost everything is being re-written, so you can't really call it backtracking.
I'd imagine the table-in-table "bugs" you're talking about make assumptions about the box-model that aren't necessarily true. (e.g., that the contained table's box is the exact size of the container)
If I recall, nothing perpetuates faster than a misquote. You should know better than to assume a quote that came from Bill Gates is accurate.
It was more along the lines of "...I can envision a day when every that can be patented will have been." Not much better, but less egregious than what's being thrown around.
I have no problem giving up personal privacy (which I will admit is basically a joke) as long as all corporations are likewise forbidden from keeping any secrets. Free information.
I have no problem giving up personal privacy (which I will admit is basically a joke) as long as all corporations are likewise forbidden from keeping any secrets. Free information.
Slashdot Mirror
Like it or lump it, Mozilla's biggest problem is that their competition actually has out right now something that may be superior to most of what they are still building. Like it or lump it, IE is pretty slick.
Except that IE5 is still far from standards compliant, and tries to bite off more than it can chew, like all browsers previous to it. e.g., trying to implement CSS2 before you get CSS1 right, trying to do XSL before it's even a standard. It's more embrace-extend-corrupt, which is why Mozilla will be better, regardless of the "new feature set" hype.
This is a good point -- this is brought up in The Cathedral and the Bazaarm, point number 14:
No, not tech support. Service. This means more along the lines of implementation -- fitting a product in with other products/needs in a business setting.
Really, how many programmers are coding shrink-wrapped/commercial software? And how many more are working on custom implementations? Would this really change the software market that much? The software will still be needed. Someone will still find ways to make money off of it. It'll just be better software because it's open source.
IIRC, reviews are free to excerpt.
Or perhaps where threads are sorted by median score, or some sort of average score, with higher weights given to comments higher in the hierarchy.
...and the better option is?
Opera doesn't even support 95% of CSS1.
I think this may depend on the implicit (well, not implicit with M3 - it's in res) UA-stylesheet. The cascade of preferences is, I believe:
I'm imagining that the HTML specs don't say that tables should inherit properties of parent tables, and M3 is interpreting this correctly, and applying the UA style to the child tables.
But I really don't know anything...
There really was no core of Mozilla. At least nothing version 5 would want to use. It was a tag-soup "parser" (gee, here's a - let's start making things bold). It's a miracle that they could tack on as much JS and CSS crap as they did. I'd imagine almost everything is being re-written, so you can't really call it backtracking.
I'd imagine the table-in-table "bugs" you're talking about make assumptions about the box-model that aren't necessarily true. (e.g., that the contained table's box is the exact size of the container)
If I recall, nothing perpetuates faster than a misquote. You should know better than to assume a quote that came from Bill Gates is accurate.
It was more along the lines of "...I can envision a day when every that can be patented will have been." Not much better, but less egregious than what's being thrown around.
Duh.
Dave Mathews Band - Crash.
I have no problem giving up personal privacy (which I will admit is basically a joke) as long as all corporations are likewise forbidden from keeping any secrets. Free information.
I have no problem giving up personal privacy (which I will admit is basically a joke) as long as all corporations are likewise forbidden from keeping any secrets. Free information.
Don't I recall it going GM about a month ago? I think Apple's supposed to announce it at this expo.