W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2005

Re: [css-background] Best method to submit proposal

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
Message-ID: <20050411215643.GB12123@Candy.local>

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

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 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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:27:17 UTC