CSS 2.2 What is the fate of a headache?

Css

HTML 5 has recently been a big, contentious debate, and now comes a CSS 2.2

Indeed, CSS 3 is too long to drag ... Andy Budd that it is slow to finalize because can chew (there are 40 modules), the WEB changes more and more quickly, the things that have been fixed over a period of time to find and need to modify, so how to change also can not finish, when is an end. Always want to make their own perfect, always want to think about all the future of the situation, the result ignores the current real urgent problem, this is the most current version of CSS 3, the biggest obstacle. So Andy proposes to add some of the urgent content in CSS 3, or content that meets some common needs, to CSS 2.1, and upgrade to CSS 2.2 to facilitate the introduction of a new CSS version.

However, personal feeling, this does not have the cooperation of the browser manufacturer, even if the Internet set a CSS 2.2 to come out and how? Mozilla and Opera can be optimistic, but what about IE? What about IE, which accounts for the largest market share in browsers? And do not say the share of IE7 is still very little, is still in the plan of IE 8 The current goal is only to improve the support of CSS 2.1! CSS 2.2 comes out who can guarantee that its fate is not as miserable as 2.1?

The early pace of CSS development was pretty impressive. The proposed by Hakon Lie in OCT 1994, CSS1 became one of the the the "the" of the The "the", recommendations in DEC 1996. Nipping at its heals, CSS2 became a official recommendation in/May 1998, just months. By June 1999 the "3 draft modules of CSS3 had been published, and in their ground breaking book published that same y Ear, Bert Bos and Hakon Lie postulated, CSS3 would arrive sometime in late 1999.

Over 7 years later, and we ' re still waiting. This begs the question, what went wrong?

For a recent conference, I decided to do a talk on CSS3. While researching all the "cool CSS3 features modern browsers support, I became intrigued why things were taking so long." I started reading up on the consortium, how it is structured, how to became a and exactly who is on the CSS working GRO Up. I started speaking to existing members and invited experts, reading blogs posts from critics and people who had resigned, a nd looking at every bit of public information I could find.

Organisations pay thousands of the dollars to join the "the", and in "return" to "set" agenda on forthcoming Technologi Es. While most of the "companies involved are eager to shape" future of the Internet in a positive direction, they all have Their own agendas. Some obviously want to build better browsers, while others are worried about backwards compatibility and engineering PROBL Ems. Some organisations have a vested interest in technologies as SVG, while such others more are with concerned the We b up to different platforms like mobile phones and TV. By paying to is a member of the "the", companies are able to get some of the brightest minds in the industry on the Issues important to their business, and who can blame them?

CSS3 has been in development in it's current form since early 2000. There are currently 5 modules in ' candidate release ' status, and a further 6 are in ' Last Call ' status. This sounds good, until your realise that selectors module is in ' candidate release ' as far back as 2001, and got roll Ed back to "last called" in 2005. Some of the current modules are set to is rolled back while the other modules like the "box Model" Module haven ' t been touche D since 2002. of the or so modules, only the "TV profile" and media queries modules are nearing completion. Lucky us.

There are various reasons why this is taking so long. Many of the issues are technical and can ' t be avoided; Problems when testing, issues with backwards compatibility and bugs with browser implementation. However There also seems to be a lot of politics. Discussions are getting bogged down into the same old arguments this occur time and again, priorities have, been given to the Wrong areas, and companies have been pursuing their own, personal agendas.

Despite being broken down to separate modules, the scope of CSS3 is vast. As as is as trying to the needs of the "current Web", the are trying to anticipate the future. One of the big issues are internationalisation, which brings up problems most of us haven ' t even heard of before. Tibetan style text justification anybody? Also with the "project taking so long," the are working in a constantly shifting. What may have been true about the web back in, may isn't true today, next year or in the next decade.

My fear are that the "has bitten off" than it can chew, and this is has a negative on the web. We currently live in a world of live texture mapping and rag doll physics. And yet as Web developers, we don ' t even have the ability to create rounded corner boxes. The consortium are so concerned with shaping the future, I ' m worried that they may have forgotten the present. Forgotten the needs of the average web designer and developer.

I ' ve been thinking about this for a while, and wonder if we need a interim step. If CSS3 is as big and complicated as the development timeline suggests, maybe we need something? Something that gives us designers and developers the tools we need today, and not the "tools" we need in five or ten years. Maybe we should take all of the immediately useful parts of CSS3 such as multiple background images, border radius and Mul Ti-column layout. Maybe we should take all CSS3 properties, value and selectors currently supported by the likes Safari, Opera and Firef Ox. Maybe we should take all of the this information and builds a simpler, interim specification we can start using now. Maybe, just Maybe, it ' s time for CSS2.2?

Chinese from: old9 English Original: Andybudd