Huh? Why would that be a valid point? It's no harder to swap out different kinds of render methods than it is to swap style sheets.

BTW:

> Programs written in compiled or runtime-based languages either run or they fail.

This is simply not true. No matter what you're writing code in, you can write it in a way that exhibits graceful degradation. It's just that some languages make it easier than others.

> It's no harder to swap out different kinds of render methods than it is to swap style sheets

The point is that with css the client can change the rendering in ways not foreseen by the developers. If I happen to have a rare form of color-blindness that means I cannot perceive the color purple, I can create a Firefox extension that changes purple to blue, and immediately all websites in the world becomes accessible to me.

If we consider HTML a kind of object-code where presentation is hardcoded into the on-the-wire output (like eg. PostScript), I would have to call around to all web-masters in the world and beg them to change their render-methods to accommodate my unique disability.

'Huh? Why would that be a valid point? It's no harder to swap out different kinds of render methods than it is to swap style sheets.'

its much much harder to switch rendering engines than to switch css files

try changing this websites rendering engine, first you need to hack the server, then you need to understand the source code(and learn the language if you dont know it already), then learn how the renders are perfomed, how the data is modelled.

then try switching its stylesheet, that can be a click away if you want it.

What you say is true, but only because the software most people use on their servers makes it true. The conclusion is not that we should continue to use the current broken infrastructure, but that we should build different infrastructure. Your argument is kind of like someone in 1904 arguing that air travel will never be commercially viable because there aren't any airports.

I find it a bit distressing that I would have to explain this here on HN of all places.

I didnt make an argument I pointed out a blatantly incorrect statement.

but to follow your point is there anything fundamentally flawed in the concept of html/css/javascript that makes portable sites impossible, or are you suggesting we make some pluggable generic server side rendering that can be controlled by the client because css doesnt deal with heights very well yet?

> is there anything fundamentally flawed in the concept of html/css/javascript that makes portable sites impossible

No, of course not.

> or are you suggesting we make some pluggable generic server side rendering that can be controlled by the client because css doesnt deal with heights very well yet

Yeah, pretty much. That way you don't have to wait for the standards bodies or the browser developers.

I'm not sure, are you talking about changing the render method to output clean html which the user can style themselves?

Don't bother answering, I'm really confused. Why doesn't the world use XML and XSLT? I give up. I'm gonna just code using tables from now on.. o_O