W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > December 2015

Fwd: [css-flexbox] Transition Request, CSS Flexible Box Layout Level 1 to CR (updated)

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 19:13:10 -0500
To: "www-archive@w3.org" <www-archive@w3.org>
Message-ID: <56847316.3020101@inkedblade.net>
For public archive, in case anyone else wants to use Chris Lilley's template. :p

~fantasai

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: [css-flexbox] Transition Request, CSS Flexible Box Layout Level 1 to  CR (updated)
Resent-Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2015 00:08:03 +0000
Resent-From: w3c-css-wg@w3.org
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 19:07:17 -0500
From: fantasai

Hello PLH,

This is a transition request for CSS Flexible Box Layout Level 1 to
Candidate Recommendation.

* Document title, URIs, and estimated publication date
- CSS Flexible Box Layout Module Level 1
- ED at http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-flexbox-1/
- The Tuesday or Thursday after a successful transition meeting (or decision)

* The document Abstract and Status sections
http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-flexbox-1/#abstract
http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-flexbox-1/#status

* Decision to request transition
RESOLVED: Take Flexbox to CR
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2015Dec/0233.html

* Changes
See http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-flexbox-1/#changes

* Requirements satisfied
No requirements document.

* Dependencies met (or not)
- CSS2.1 - REC
- CSS Fragmentation - CR
- CSS Cascade - CR
- CSS Images - CR
- CSS Writing Modes - CR
- CSS Values - CR
- CSS Sizing - WD (mainly for terminology)

Non-dependent normative references:
- CSS Display - WD (point at interaction with new 'display' values therein)
- CSS Multicol - CR (define non-interaction with multicol properties)
- CSS UI - CR (define interaction with UI's box-sizing)

* Wide Review
The document went through a (2005 process) Last Call in 2012,
and then transitioned to CR. It was returned to LC in 2014 to
process further comments due from implementation experience
(per 2005 process rules), and cycled through three additional
LC drafts, procuring numerous comments, both on the changes
themselves and also on additional problems found. These are
documented in the corresponding Dispositions of Comments.
The rate of substantive comments has declined over the last
year, resulting in enough stability to zero out the open
issues and request a transition back to CR.
   http://drafts.csswg.org/css-flexbox-1/issues-cr-2012
   http://drafts.csswg.org/css-flexbox-1/issues-lc-20140325
   http://drafts.csswg.org/css-flexbox-1/issues-lc-20140925
   http://drafts.csswg.org/css-flexbox-1/issues-lc-20150514

* Issues addressed
See above

* Formal Objections
None, but see https://drafts.csswg.org/css-flexbox/issues-lc-20150514#issue-11
The CSSWG was unable to come to a consensus (a first in over a decade, IIRC),
and so we followed Ralph Swick's advice to record both behaviors as allowed,
with the hope that implementations will eventually converge and the spec
updated to match.

* Implementation
Aside from pagination, which is reported to be pretty poor, Flexbox is
thoroughly implemented in Gecko, Blink & Webkit, Trident/Edge, and even
Presto. Bugfixes are ongoing, as implementations are not yet perfectly
compliant.

A test suite is in development and currently has 660 tests written by
a variety of contributors. Missing tests will be added and implementations
further tested during the CR period.

* Patent disclosures
(none)
http://www.w3.org/2004/01/pp-impl/32061/status

~fantasai
Received on Thursday, 31 December 2015 00:13:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 31 December 2015 00:13:44 UTC