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

Re: How Do I Propose a CSS3 Spec Change?

From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 00:12:21 +1100
Message-ID: <43734735.9020602@lachy.id.au>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
CC: W3C Style List <www-style@w3.org>

Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Nov 2005, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
>> What are the chances of such a proposal at least being discussed for 5 
>> minutes (before being rejected) at the next CSSWG meeting?
> 
> At the _next_ meeting, almost zero.
> 
> However, if it is a suggestion for a spec that I am an editor of (at the 
> moment that would be CSS2.1, Selectors, Lists, and Generated Content), it 
> is almost guarenteed to be discussed at a future meeting. Issues raised 
> and proposals made get added to a first-in-first-out issues list, and 
> issues remain on the list until they are resolved.

That's very good to know.  Your previous response seemed to imply that 
unless we can afford to become a W3C member (or get hired by an existing 
member company), join the CSSWG and go through the rest of the process, 
we basically haven't got a chance of being listened to, and that the 
"informal process" was just a waste of time.  It's good to see that this 
is not entirely the case.

> Similarly, all the Selectors ideas, even those that were dismissed as 
> crackpot ideas on the mailing list, have been looked at by at least one of 
> the Selectors editors. The good ones have been further discussed at face 
> to face meetings. Proposals such as those on how to deal with table 
> columns in selectors have been given extensive thought.

Is there any chance of seeing an overview of these good ones that have 
been further discussed and are being considered for future CSS specs 
(not just for selectors) beyond those that get mentioned fairly 
regularly here, like :matches(), calc(), table selectors, etc., or do we 
have to wait until they show up in a future working draft?

-- 
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/
Received on Thursday, 10 November 2005 13:12:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:41 GMT