- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 18:05:38 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005, Chris Lilley wrote: > > This comment is sent from both the CDF WG and the SVG WG. > > CSS 2.1 is said to be both a development from CSS 2.0 (and CSS 1.0 )and > a replacement for CSS 2.0; later it is described as a partial > replacement for CSS2.0, with removed features being defined in CSS2; it > is also stated that such features may move into CSS3. Will CSS 1.0 and > 2.0 continue to be maintained, with eratta, or are they abandoned? > http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-CSS21-20050613/ > In addition, later the spec talks of removing features from CSS2: > > Removing CSS2 features that will be obsoleted by CSS3, thus > encouraging adoption of the proposed CSS3 features in their place. > > http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-CSS21-20050613/about.html#q1 (Subsequent e-mails clarified that what was actually being requested was a clarification to the above.) The working group discussed this issue in depth. While we could not determine exactly what was ambiguous, we have decided to make a change to the abstract and section 1.1, removing the sentence starting "Implementations may refer to CSS2...", and replacing it with "Future specs should refer to CSS2.1 (unless they need features from CSS2 which have been dropped in CSS2.1, and then they should only reference CSS2 for those features, or preferably reference such feature(s) in the respective CSS3 Module that includes those feature(s))." If you are not satisfied with this resolution, please state exactly how we can resolve your issue, with precise proposed changes to the text of the specification, so that we can debate this issue more concretely. Cheers, -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 18 October 2005 18:05:45 UTC