W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 2008

[css3-color] Moving css3-color to last call

From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 18:13:33 -0700
To: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <20080603011333.GA2019@pickering.dbaron.org>

I propose that we (the working group) publish as a last call
(dropping back from Candidate Recommendation to drop features) the
draft currently at http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-color/ with the
following changes:

 * Appropriate changes for "Editor's Draft" -> "Last Call Working
   Draft", plus anything else needed for pubrules

 * A link added to a disposition of comments that is just a
   color-coded version of
   http://csswg.inkedblade.net/spec/css3-color

We agreed to most of the changes (described in
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Mar/0304.html ) at
the last face-to-face.  Since then, the changes since then are those
listed in
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/csswg/css3-color/Overview.src.html , the
substantive ones being:

 + revise edits for issue 4 to reflect that we shouldn't specify a
bad behavior for clamping out-of-bounds rgb() color values.  (A
bunch of the change to do this was actually pulling over edits
between CSS2 and CSS2.1.):
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/csswg/css3-color/Overview.src.html.diff?r1=1.26&r2=1.27&f=h

 + add resolution for issue 26
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/csswg/css3-color/Overview.src.html.diff?r1=1.25&r2=1.26&f=h

 + Pull over a few other changes between CSS2 and CSS2.1, most of
which (other than the one mentioned above) were minor wording
changes:
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/csswg/css3-color/Overview.src.html.diff?r1=1.27&r2=1.28&f=h


To do this, the group would need to resolve on my proposed
resolutions for issues 25-28 as listed in
http://csswg.inkedblade.net/spec/css3-color .  (Issue 28 was split
out of 12/14/15, since I realized there was a fourth issue in the
email while responding to it.)


Given that the additional last call is for the purpose of dropping
features, I propose a short review period.  The minimum allowed is
three weeks; I think specifying that would be reasonable, although
in reality we probably won't advance the draft immediately when
those three weeks are up.

-David

-- 
L. David Baron                                 http://dbaron.org/
Mozilla Corporation                       http://www.mozilla.com/
Received on Tuesday, 3 June 2008 01:14:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:55:07 GMT