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

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

From: Christoph Päper <christoph.paeper@crissov.de>
Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2011 12:49:52 +0100
Message-Id: <3922934E-983C-4647-882E-C68A1B025D8F@crissov.de>
To: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Peter Linss:
> On Mar 2, 2011, at 10:56 PM, Peter Moulder wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 03:48:49AM +0000, Linss, Peter wrote:
>> 
>>> CSS 2.1 has been in the pipeline for far too long,

I wholeheartedly agree.

>>> many other specs normatively depend on it and it needs to be a REC to unblock progress in other areas. 
>> 
>> What other specs are those, and what bits of CSS2.1 do they depend on?
> 
> How about every other CSS module? […]
> 
>> Knowing what the dependencies are might help us concentrate on what actually matters to other specs.
> 
> No, identifying dependencies on areas of the spec isn't helpful at all.

Not now, I agree, not with that monolithic spec.

> Identifying areas to focus on would only help if we were going to break CSS2.1 into modules that could advance individually, and we're not going to do that.

Actually, I believe that this would be a reasonable next step in a process like this:

 0. Finish level 2.1 and collect errata.
 1. Identify level 3 modules that 
    a) (will) cover parts from 2.1 and
    b) are far from reaching CR or better.
 2. Make new WDs for them, which only cover the 2.1 (plus errata) stuff.
 3. Fasttrack them to REC. 
 4. Let other specs and CSS modules reference them instead of 2.1.
 5. Begin (re)adding new stuff to bypassed modules as level 3.x or level 4.
 6. Forget CSS 2.1 ever happened.

This (c|w)ould leave us with a clean modular specification whose parts can safely advance independently.
Received on Saturday, 5 March 2011 11:50:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:38 GMT