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

Re: The Progress of CSS

From: Orion Adrian <orion.adrian@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 16:35:49 -0400
Message-ID: <abd6c80105070113353fa1bf84@mail.gmail.com>
To: www-style@w3.org

On 7/1/05, Adam Kuehn <akuehn@nc.rr.com> wrote:
> 
> Lost in the various Holy Wars of the "CSS is doomed" thread is the
> concern about time.  I think that is an important and valid concern.
> 
> Although the current CSS2.1 spec is the only version of CSS2 directly
> linked from the W3C home page, 2.1 still carries the notation, "It is
> inappropriate to cite this document as other than work in progress."
> The "current" Recommendation, therefore, is CSS2.  CSS 2.1, moreover,
> says of itself that compared to CSS2, it "corrects a few errors" and
> "adds a few highly-requested features".  I read that as saying, in
> short, that it is a relatively minor revision.
> 
> That's as of today, 1 July, 2005.  Yet the "current" version carries
> the date 18-May-1998.  That's more than SEVEN YEARS for a relatively
> minor revision.
> 
> Whatever message you have taken from the rest of the thread, I think
> it should be clear that the process is taking too long and effort
> should be made to speed it up.  I'm not meaning to suggest that the
> working group is lazy, or that resources are being squandered.
> Mostly I am suggesting that these limitations should be recognized,
> and the process itself should be streamlined.
> 
> If CSS3 has to wait to become a formal Rec more than seven years
> after CSS2.1 is finally approved, CSS may, in fact, be doomed.

Thank you. I for one appologize for getting caught up in battles of
beliefs and wasting everyone's time.

Orion Adrian
Received on Friday, 1 July 2005 20:35:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:39 GMT