faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf
main
parent
thread
|
Re: Get rid of the splash-screen!
by Ingo Klöcker on Wednesday 11/Sep/2002, @02:56
|
> From the economics standpoint would you rather have the C++ developers
> reading language docs and assembling tags and toolbars or less than 1% of
> users, who work in those environments, setting them up while development
> continues?
Not supporting the current standard which is XHTML 1.0/1.1 is IMO a serious lack. Saying that a C++ programmer is overqualified to do it is a lame excuse. You can't seriously intend to release Quanta 3.0 without full support for XHTML 1.0. If no user steps up and adds the support then someone of the developers will have to bite into the sour apple (German saying) and add it.
As I write my webpages in XHTML I need this. But I don't have the time to add it to Quanta since I'm busy developing KMail.
Anyway, thanks for a wonderful program!
Regards,
Ingo |
|
|
The Fine Print: The following comments
are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
Re: Get rid of the splash-screen!
by Andras Mantia on Wednesday 11/Sep/2002, @03:26
|
Ok, I've noted your point of view. I will bring this up on the devel list.
Andras
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Get rid of the splash-screen!
by Eric Laffoon on Wednesday 11/Sep/2002, @04:05
|
> Not supporting the current standard which is XHTML 1.0/1.1 is IMO a serious lack.
> Saying that a C++ programmer is overqualified to do it is a lame excuse. You can't
> seriously intend to release Quanta 3.0 without full support for XHTML 1.0. If no
> user steps up and adds the support then someone of the developers will have to bite
> into the sour apple (German saying) and add it.
Well thanks a lot Ingo! The validity of your point seems less important than the fact that people tend to take the path of least resistance doesn't it? ;-)
I am not arguing a C++ programmer is overqualified. I'm saying that we are designing Quants so that 1) it doesn't require a C++ programmer to add a markup dialect, 2) it is no longer the best use of programmer time because it will take that programmer off a number of tasks that users also want done and 3) that a user will always have a better idea about ergonomic aspects of what they use all the time than a developer who rarely touches it.
My other point is that in order to make a superior program you need to involve large numbers of people. Our goal has been to substantially lower the threshold of entry. While your point is valid it is from a perspective of limited user development web development has more developer oriented users than other apps. By my estimates we have hundreds of thousands if not millions of Quanta users. It only takes one person to do some XML to add any markup or scripting language. The arguments you make for XHTML can be made for ColdFusion, ASP, JSP, Java, Python/Zope, Perl, DocBook and numerous XML dialects. One user out of every, say ten thousand, could bring all of this to Quanta... or we could postpone CVS integration, auto doc generation, advanced site planning tools and more for an entire point revision of KDE.
> As I write my webpages in XHTML I need this. But I don't have the time to add it to Quanta since I'm busy developing KMail.
You'll have it and of course I don't expect you to divert from KMail to set it up. You see I want you to keep working on KMail as I'm not up to speed on it so I will make sure XHTML is there. See? this is my prinicple at work. ;-)
> Anyway, thanks for a wonderful program!
You're welcome. I hope soon it is just exactly what you wanted. (Of course as the old American saying goes "if you want something done right you've got to do it yourself" so don't think I won't accept patches if you don't think we get the XHTML support right. ;-))
Cheers
Eric
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
The Fine Print: The previous
comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
|
![[KDE Dot News]](http://www.kde.org/dot/Images/kdedotnews.gif)
