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

Re: [css3-lists] remove "Complex Counter Styles" and "Optional Extended Counter Styles" sections

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 06:37:34 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDDHnqoLatm3TSLoVyy=FqkeM9MS6pU7uuQOBEoLSj1fqg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
Cc: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, www-style@w3.org
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 1:47 AM, Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com> wrote:
> Also sprach fantasai:
>
>  > > I think it would be best to remove sections 11 and 12.  At the very
>  > > least both sections should be marked for further discussion with an
>  > > appropriate issue:
>  >
>  > This was already discussed and resolved in May, and sections 11 and
>  > 12 are implementing that resolution, at least wrt CJK list styles.
>  >    http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011May/0234.html
>
> John's proposal, which I support, overarches the discussion about the
> scope of the algorithm. There has never been consensus on having
> section 11/12 in the spec. I have asked for an alternative solution to
> be presented:
>
>  - Issue: should we replace the numbering systems described in chapter
>   11 with spelled-out lists that can be expressed without defining
>   algorithms? Before deciding, spelled-out lists up to, say 100, should be
>   added for comparison purposes.
>
>   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Nov/0449.html
>   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Jun/0505.html
>
> I expect it to be present in the upcoming WD.

That issue is already present in the ED, at the start of chapter 11.
I put it in there a few days ago.

~TJ
Received on Thursday, 24 November 2011 14:38:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:46 GMT