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

Re: [CSS21] WG process - next steps for CSS21?

From: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 09:32:05 +0100
Message-ID: <4D6F5205.9080002@moonhenge.net>
To: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
CC: "Linss, Peter" <peter.linss@hp.com>
On 03/03/2011 04:48, Linss, Peter wrote:
> On Mar 2, 2011, at 3:57 PM, fantasai wrote:
>> On 03/02/2011 03:22 PM, Anton Prowse wrote:
>>>> 204 - NEEDS PROPOSAL. I suggest we move to Errata.
>>> (etc)
>>> Please could the WG state what the anticipated next steps are for
>>> this spec! There are *lots* of issues which were raised when the
>>> spec was CR that haven't been filed on the issues list, and lots
>>> more which were raised before the deadline for comments when the
>>> spec went back to Last Call which also have not been filed yet
>>> (at least, not publicly filed).
>> I don't represent the WG in this message, but I believe the plan is
>> to address all open issues at the F2F next week. I plan to work on
>> filing the remaining issues this week/end in preparation for this
>> starting tomorrow morning (or late today, if I get to it).
> Ok, I _do_ represent the WG in this message.
> Our stated plan at this point is to prepare CSS2.1 for PR at our F2F
> next week.
> This means:
 > 1) address all open issues.
 > 2) find a way to get past all of our remaining blocked tests (either
 >    get 2 passing implementations or change the spec to allow removing
 >    or modifying the test).
 > 3) get the final edits into the spec.
 > 4) request a transition to PR and put CSS 2.1 behind us.
> After that we'll work on an errata for CSS 2.1 which will be
> updated/published as needed, but CSS 2.1 will be otherwise closed.
> We'll also re-open the CSS2.1 test suite to new submissions after it
> goes to REC, we intend the test suite to be a living thing (we'll
> keep a snapshot of what got us to REC).
> The issues list we're paying attention to is at:
> http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css2.1
> If there are issues that you know about that aren't on that list,
> please let us know ASAP (and not a simple statement, like "I know of
> more issues", give us concrete pointers) so we can have the list up
> to date before our F2F.

A bunch of issues were raised by various people just before the deadline 
for comments on the Last Call; the WG needs to refer to the mailing list 
archives for the days surrounding that deadline.

Personally, I already sent a summary of issues which I raised on the old 
CR that are as yet either unfiled or whose resolution I am disputing; 
this is [1].

> CSS 2.1 has been in the pipeline for far too long, many other specs
> normatively depend on it and it needs to be a REC to unblock progress
> in other areas.

Indeed, I understand the pressure that the WG is under.

> At this point, we're going to be _extremely_ draconian about
> deferring any and all issues that can possibly be deferred. Please
> help us make this very important milestone by understanding our
> efforts and reasons for doing so. It is not our intention to ignore
> any issues or people's feedback, we'll simply move the issue to the
> 2.1 errata or a CSS3 module and deal with it later.

Many issues raised could survive being treated as errata since they 
concern areas which are underspecified; it's acceptable to say "CSS21 
didn't give enough detail about X so refer to errata or CSS3 for more 
complete information".

On the other hand, I do intend to chase up issues already raised which 
concern a significantly /incorrect/ specification.

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Dec/0312.html

Anton Prowse
http://dev.moonhenge net
Received on Thursday, 3 March 2011 08:32:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:44 UTC