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

Re: [css3-images] Resolving on gradient issues

From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2011 00:23:43 +0200
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <5agj371b75rm7c8q9kla4cgmb0rr3pc5i0@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
* Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 7:25 AM, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com> wrote:
>> Always ? Really ? I don't recall seeing an ED with a lot of
>> substantive changes going straight to LC. (To be clear, I'm
>> not saying the process prevents you from doing it but it seems
>> peculiar given the nature of the changes and the controversy
>> some of them have generated).
>
>Can we please not have this discussion?  My intention is to publish an
>LC draft.  If that involves going through a WD first, whatever.
>That's irrelevant.  The point is, I'm done with Images 3, and would
>like to cut it off and kick it further up the process chain.

The best practise is to publish a normal working draft that you think
addresses all known issues, making sure those issues raised have been
formally addressed, and then ensure that draft is reviewed by group
members interested in implementing what's specified plus other groups
that may be interested, in the case here SVG (due to image-rendering),
WAI (are there accessibility issues with `element()`? the draft does
not seem to mention any) and HTML (is it well-defined how `element()`
image data is generated, for instance, do you render the options list
of a select form control if the user expands it?) would be obvious.

Having records of people and groups noting they reviewed the document
and found no issues with it is best.

It's common practise these days to publish a Last Call the moment the
draft looks vaguely feature-complete and then expect everybody to re-
view it. That tends to lead to unpredictable schedules, repeated Last
Calls, and annoyed reviewers who then review less, in my experience so
I would indeed recommend following the best practise. Procedurally you
can do whatever you want as there is no notable process enforcement.

(As an aside, the draft should include an example with sample render-
ing of using `element()` to reference an inline element that wraps in
the middle, and it should probably say something about elements that
the margin properties do not apply to.)
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ 
Received on Wednesday, 3 August 2011 22:24:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:43 GMT