Re: TODO additions

[Dave Love]

Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:

> Many pages are unusable without Internet Explorer, or unusable
> without Flash

I know only too well, but Flash isn't in HTML 3.2, for instance.

> I don't have personal experience with either kind of page, so I can't
> say whether supporting background images "correctly" does more harm or
> more good.

I don't think it can actually harm.

> What I can say is that people should not blindly assume
> that supporting them "correctly" is the right choice.

I'm not assuming anything like that blindly.  In fact facilities for
the blind is one of the things I'm interested in supporting, though I
haven't been able to devote time to raman's W3 issues recently.

> But maybe the issue is not a real one.  If "correct" implementation of
> background images is not a possible, then why worry about the issue?

If XEmacs does it, presumably there isn't actually a fundamental
difficulty.  It's not worth further argument, anyhow.