W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2013

Re: [css3-page] comments on last ED

From: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@kozea.fr>
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 18:23:33 +0100
Message-ID: <5127A995.6060601@kozea.fr>
To: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
CC: www-style@w3.org
Le 22/02/2013 17:18, Daniel Glazman a ťcrit :
> Implementing a CR that has been modified/fixed/improved during
> nine years after that, it's not an experimental implementation any
> more; or it's not a REC track any more. The W3C Process never expected
> a 9 years period after CR and I remind you we're still not at REC. And
> given the state of GCPM in dev.w3.org, I would say that the REC is not
> in sight at all.

Daniel, please donít confuse css3-page with GCPM. The two documents are 
in a very different state, as Iím sure you know. This thread is only 
about css3-page.


> So we're going to be forced to standardize what AntennaHouse and
> YesLogic have been shipping for so long because in the end, yes,
> implementations do matter.

As an editor and implementor of css3-page, I donít think that itís set 
in stone. The WG resolved on multiple changes just this month. If you or 
anyone has feedback or issues to raise, this is very welcome. I very 
much appreciate your review in the initial email of this thread.


> But one 50-pages document sitting for 14 years in the same WG is a
> totally broken process, I don't think anyone can say the contrary.

Indeed this is bad. I donít know how we got there, but mild historical 
curiosity aside it does not matter. Assigning blame does not help.

So what is the way forward now, if not fixing the issues and finally 
publish css3-page? Iíve been pushing to do that for more than a year now.

-- 
Simon Sapin
Received on Friday, 22 February 2013 17:23:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:21:06 GMT