Re: Advancing Transitions, Animations and Transforms to CR

On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 2:48 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 1:25 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> My view as simultaneously a web author, a spec writer, and an
>> implementor is that prefixes are good overall, but that we currently
>> have some high-profile failures of prefixing that are distracting us.
>> Particularly, Transitions, Animations, and Transforms have been
>> languishing in WD for far too long due to neglect, and *should*
>> already be in CR.
>>
>> That's a failure of people, not the policy.  We can route around the
>> policy for these specs right now to stanch the bleeding, but the
>> correct solution is for editors to not drop their specs on the floor.
>
> Whether or not we unprefix those three features independent of spec
> progress, we still need to fix this situation. That probably means we need
> new editors for these specs ... except perhaps for Transitions, since I
> think David can continue covering there. Any volunteers?

I'm willing to do so *after* I've gotten Images and Lists to CR.
That'll be 1-3 months, though.  If someone else wants to work on it in
the meantime, that would be great.

~TJ