- From: Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 23:56:43 +0200
- To: Ben Curtis <bcurtis@bivia.com>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 02:16:28PM -0700, Ben Curtis wrote: > > I've considered the background module for a couple months now, and have > found a handful of real-world use cases that currently exist that will > be made more difficult or impossible through the multiple-background > syntax as it stands. I believe I can propose a new syntax for > multiple-backgrounds that works in these cases and (I believe) in the > cases the current background proposal works in. That sounds scary :-) Please tell me more. > > What is the best way for me to bring these ideas to the list? I hardly > want to spend a lot of my time composing something that wastes your > time. Is a thorough post on the matter best? Or a static web-page with > on-list discussion, a la the recently-cited > http://blog.ben-ward.co.uk/archive/2004/12/21/css3_required_properties > ? I understand that adhering to existing syntax/grammar when possible > is best and maybe necessary, but does it help (or hurt!) to mimc the > presentation of the spec? Hard to say without knowing the proposal :-) I wouldn't spend too much time on making the proposal look like a W3C specification. A Web page is the place if you have already worked out many details, which would be too long for an e-mail. But put some representative parts or a summary in an e-mail to this list as well. Many people will not have the time to go and read the Web page but still like to get the flavour. Bert -- Bert Bos ( W 3 C ) http://www.w3.org/ http://www.w3.org/people/bos W3C/ERCIM bert@w3.org 2004 Rt des Lucioles / BP 93 +33 (0)4 92 38 76 92 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Monday, 11 April 2005 21:56:50 UTC