Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-align] Values section shouldn't point wholesale to CSS Level 2

The CSS Working Group just discussed `[css-align] Values section shouldn't point wholesale to CSS Level 2`, and agreed to the following resolutions:

* `RESOLVED: New Values boilerplate accepted`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;astearns> topic: [css-align] Values section shouldn't point wholesale to CSS Level 2<br>
&lt;gregwhitworth> TabAtkins: can you submit a test for this when you make the change?<br>
&lt;astearns> github topic: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1397#issuecomment-311471628<br>
&lt;fantasai> TabAtkins: Issue raised by dbaron on css-align, the values section pointed straight to CSS2<br>
&lt;fantasai> TabAtkins: better to point to more up-to-date specs<br>
&lt;fantasai> TabAtkins: This text shows up in many of our specs, so we went an updated all of them... we can revert or change as necessary<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1397#issuecomment-311471628<br>
&lt;fantasai> TabAtkins: Because it's a wide-ranging change, wanted to get WG approval before making part of spec boilerplate<br>
&lt;fantasai> This specification follows the &lt;a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/about.html#property-defs">CSS property definition conventions&lt;/a> from [[!CSS2]].<br>
&lt;fantasai> Value types not defined in this specification are defined in CSS Values &amp; Units [[!CSS-VALUES-3]].<br>
&lt;fantasai> Other CSS modules may expand the definitions of these value types.<br>
&lt;fantasai> In addition to the property-specific values listed in their definitions,<br>
&lt;fantasai> all properties defined in this specification<br>
&lt;fantasai> also accept the &lt;a>CSS-wide keywords&lt;/a> keywords as their property value.<br>
&lt;fantasai> For readability they have not been repeated explicitly.<br>
&lt;fantasai> Florian: Seems to work for vast majority of specs. Have you checked it makes sense for specs that don't define properties?<br>
&lt;fantasai> Florian: Like MQ or Selectors?<br>
&lt;fantasai> TabAtkins: Those either don't have values section or it worked.<br>
&lt;fantasai> TabAtkins: One or two specs had an extra line of text, but everything that had a value section could take this without any addition<br>
&lt;fantasai> Florian: If put in bikeshed boilerplate?<br>
&lt;fantasai> TabAtkins: Defer that question to later<br>
&lt;fantasai> TabAtkins: Just wanted to verify the text, and if ppl ok to me updating all the specs<br>
&lt;fantasai> dbaron: I'm okay with the replacement, but think it could use further improvement.<br>
&lt;fantasai> dbaron: E.g. in Animations we define Animation line, CSSOM defines another line...<br>
&lt;fantasai> fantasai: I think we should have an updated propdef explainer somewhere, e.g. snapshot<br>
&lt;fantasai> dbaron: can just make everything hyperlinked<br>
&lt;fantasai> fantasai: Yeah, but should have more explanation than just a hyperlink<br>
&lt;fantasai> ...<br>
&lt;fantasai> Florian: ???<br>
&lt;fantasai> TabAtkins: It was definitely outdated, e.g. didn't link to CSS-wide keywords becaus that wasn't a thing<br>
&lt;fantasai> TabAtkins: Definitely better than what we have, could improve further.<br>
&lt;Florian> s/???/did any of the sections to be replaced have anything about what dbaron mentioned? if not, it's a strict improvement and we can deal with that later/<br>
&lt;fantasai> astearns: So you want approval of the changes<br>
&lt;fantasai> fantasai, Tab: Yes<br>
&lt;fantasai> fantasai: And also if there are specific changes desired, resolve to have us propagae those or discuss further in GitHub<br>
&lt;fantasai> astearns: Proposed to accept this improvement, raise GitHub issues for further improvement<br>
&lt;fantasai> RESOLVED: New Values boilerplate accepted<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1397#issuecomment-313258240 using your GitHub account

Received on Wednesday, 5 July 2017 23:57:51 UTC