W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2011

Re: [CSS21] Disposition of Comments

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 00:03:25 -0700
Message-ID: <4D9C103D.8040603@inkedblade.net>
To: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>
CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 04/03/2011 02:10 AM, Anton Prowse wrote:
>
>> Disposition of Comments:
>> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css2-src/issues-lc-2011.html
>> Latest draft:
>> http://www.w3.org/Style/css2-updates/draft-PR-CSS21-201103XX/
>
> I have comments to make about the following issues.
>
> Issue 225 currently marked as Invalid. The WG couldn't understand the problem I was trying to illustrate, probably because my
> illustration contained inaccuracies. I followed up in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Mar/0345.html with an
> accurate (I hope!) illustration of the problem. Note that this issue is superseded by
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Feb/0492.html which is not on the Disposition of Comments since it was
> raised after the deadline for LCWD comments. My issue still stands, however, if this later issue (which concerns a superset of
> problems) is not addressed.

OK. There's a proposal in the wiki for that, specifically to replace the
third and fourth paragraphs of 10.6.3 ("If it only has ... bottommost child.").
Here's a slighly updated version:

   | If the element has children, its height is the distance from its top content
   | edge to the first applicable of the following:
   |   * the bottom edge of the last line box, if the box establishes a inline
   |     formatting context with one or more lines
   |   * the bottom edge of the bottom collapsed margin of its last child,
   |     if the child's bottom margin does not collapse with the element's
   |     bottom margin
   |   * the bottom border edge of its last child, if the child's bottom
   |     margin collapses with the element's bottom (but not with its top)
   |     margin
   |   * zero, otherwise

Would this solve the issues?

> Issue 229 concerns how floats interact with other floats, line boxes and in-flow block boxes that occur earlier in the source;
> specifically the observation that the rules in the spec forbade floats from appearing higher than such objects but
> implementations routinely permit this when these objects do not share the float's containing block.
>
> However, the Comment URL given in the Disposition should be marked as "(first half)", and the Response and Status URLs are
> wrong: they refer to a different issue raised in the second half of the Comment URL (namely "left floats being to the right of
> a right float", which is Issue 280).
>
> The Response to Issue 229 is actually in the Minutes and Resolutions of the f2f at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Mar/0272.html and I don't think
> it was separately raised on the mailing list.

Ok, fixed.

> I've followed up on the resolution given therein and on the Issues Wiki in
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Mar/0650.html and
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Mar/0652.html but I am prepared to mark the f2f resolution as
> Verified-Accepted (although I'm very much interested to hear the WGs response to my follow-up!).

I think it's mainly a "we don't have time to figure this all out precisely"
thing.

> Regarding other issues that I raised before the deadline for comments, there are many which have not been filed on the Issues
> Wiki but have been responded to on the mailing list or wiki stating by marking them as postponed to errata or later revisions
> of CSS. I'm fine with that.
>
> There are others which were not responded to. I'm happy to re-raise the majority of those for errata or later revisions, and I
> regard them as postponed for now.

Cool. I think we need a better tracking mechanism than the wiki for the errata.
One where you can directly file all your individual issues as individual issues. :)
It's been a nightmare to keep track of all the editorial issues via mailing list.

> There is one issue which was raised and responded to, but was not filed or "concluded". David Baron provided a proposal which
> I'm happy with. I'd like this issue to added to the Issues Wiki if possible, even if it's postponed to errata. The issue is:
>
> FL3) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Mar/0366.html
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Mar/0346.html (last third)

Ok, I will file this as 288, marked deferred.

> There are two distinct issues which have been grouped together as Issue 207 on the wiki. They both stem from the same post
> which I made: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Aug/0569.html. The first half of the post concerns the fact
> that clearance results in discontinuities in position of subsequent siblings. This was the original issue that was filed as
> Issue 207. The second half of the post concerns the fact that clearance is underspecified. The resolution given on the wiki is
> that the second half is deferred to errata. I'm happy with that resolution, but I ask that the issue be filed as a separate
> Issue on the wiki. The resolution also says that the first half is a duplicate of Issue 203. This is in fact not the case, but
> as I said in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Mar/0424.html I'm happy to defer it to errata. I ask that the
> resolution on the wiki be updated with that information.

Ok, I will split this issue into 287 and 207 and update the wiki and DoC accordingly.

> Please consider this post as verifying the Resolutions to all other issues raised by me on the Disposition of Comments.

Thanks.

~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 6 April 2011 07:03:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:39 GMT