- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 07:49:31 -0700
- To: "Alan Gresley" <alan@css-class.com>, www-style@w3.org
On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 03:54:35 -0700, Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com> wrote: > The above was written on the 23rd of Jun 2007 (the rate of change is > remarkable). I only have one question at this point. Does CSS2.1 have > holes in it that are just so big that they are just being overlooked on > purpose? There are things that are not adequately covered, such as the table model. But that's not overlooked on purpose, that's just delayed for CSS3 to solve. Things that the WG does consider solvable for CSS 2.1 are fixed, such as the various parsing issues raised on this list. Furthermore, since all technical discussion happens in public and we've two implementors who do their work in public intentionally hiding "big holes" seems rather tricky. Is there a particular reason why you raise this concern? -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Friday, 28 March 2008 14:50:26 UTC