W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > December 2010

Re: A attempt at a summary of today's discussion on Snapshots

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 14:03:18 -0800
Message-ID: <4D093B26.8010308@inkedblade.net>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: Stephen Zilles <szilles@adobe.com>, "www-style@w3.org list" <www-style@w3.org>
On 12/15/2010 01:16 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> I think this all seems reasonable.  I wasn't aware that we'd agreed to
> name documents without numbering until they're stable.

We didn't. We resolved that modules should rev independently, and that
they should be named accordingly as CSS Foobar Module Level N.

We have a couple of problems in this respect:

1. A number of modules are prefixed with 'css3-' for historical reasons,
    even though they are not Level 3 of anything. E.g. CSS Namespaces and
    CSS Template Layout. This is technically fixable: if we want, we can
    resolve on this and ask webreq to make the appropriate changes in the
    shortnames. (Webreq might not be happy with us about it, but it's
    certainly possible.)

2. It's shorter and easier to write CSS3 Backgrounds and Borders than
    CSS Backgrounds and Borders Module Level 3 (the full, formal name),
    so we do it all the time.

~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 15 December 2010 22:04:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:35 GMT