W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > December 2004

Re: LC Comment - Script & Progressive Rendering / Multiple Pages

From: Adam Kuehn <akuehn@nc.rr.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 18:03:25 -0500
Message-Id: <p06110403bdd3fb447f04@[]>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>
Cc: www-style@w3.org

Ian Hickson wrote:

>CSS2 may well be rescinded once CSS2.1 reaches REC, that's still being
>considered. The biggest problem with doing that is that documents
>normatively refer to CSS2, and that some of the features in CSS2 are not
>in CSS2.1 and the equivalent CSS3 drafts have not been published yet.
>Therefore rescinding the spec would result in dangling pointers which
>would require other specs to be rereleased causing a ripple effect. It
>certainly is the intent of the CSS working group that CSS2.1 replace CSS2
>as far as the normative definition of CSS Level 2 goes.

If the intent of the CSS working group is that CSS2.1 replaces CSS2 
(and that intent does, indeed, seem quite clear - indeed, can the 2.1 
spec reasonably be read any other way?), then it is completely 
obvious that the CSS2 spec should be rescinded.  The downside you 
mention is dangling pointers.  However, the alternative to that evil 
is the far worse evil of outright incorrect pointers.  If CSS2 is no 
longer intended to be normative, then normative pointers *need* to be 
updated.  Bite the bullet.

Just my opinion, of course.


-Adam Kuehn
Received on Wednesday, 1 December 2004 23:04:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:27:16 UTC