W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > September 2018

Re: Retiring Obsolete CSS Notes

From: Fuqiao Xue <xfq@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2018 14:39:39 +0800
Cc: Philippe Le Hégaret <plh@w3.org>, Rossen Atanassov <Rossen.Atanassov@microsoft.com>, Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>, W3C www-style mailing list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-Id: <0212A7E5-92EA-455F-AE43-29F788414D84@w3.org>
To: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
Hi Florian,

> On Sep 7, 2018, at 2:36 PM, Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net> wrote:
> 
>> On Sep 7, 2018, at 13:16, Fuqiao Xue <xfq@w3.org> wrote:
>> 
>> On 2018-09-06 23:49, Florian Rivoal wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>> PLH and I were talking about obsoleting and superseding stuff, and I
>>> checked the status on the CSS-WG's Notes.
>>> https://www.w3.org/TR/?tag=css&status=note
>>> One that I was surprised to find there is the CSS  Profile
>>> (https://www.w3.org/TR/css-print/). I thought we had retired it, along
>>> with all other profiles, which are indeed no longer showing in that
>>> index page.
>>> I have not yet been able to locate the resolution where we decided to
>>> do so, but the text in the 2018 CSS Snapshot ED (still pending
>>> publication, sorry for procrastinating) agrees with my memory:
>>>> 2.2. CSS Profiles
>>>> Not all implementations will implement all functionality defined in CSS.
>>>> In the past, the Working Group published a few Profiles, which were meant to define the minimal subset of CSS that various classes of User Agents were expected to support.
>>>> This effort has been discontinued, as the Working Group was not finding it effective or useful, and the profiles previously defined are now unmaintained.
>>> Did we carve out an exception that I'm failing to remember for the
>>> Print Profile, or did it just slip through the cracks where we retired
>>> the others?
>>> Speaking of which, I'll note that other profiles
>>> (https://www.w3.org/TR/css-mobile/ & https://www.w3.org/TR/css-tv/)
>>> while correctly missing from the TR index page, do not carry any
>>> indication inside the document that they are obsolete either.
>>> Regardless of what happened previous, I think all 3 profiles should be
>>> fully obsoleted.
>> 
>> From the minutes[1] I guess it slipped through the cracks. All three specs' ED has obsoletion notes, but css-print's TR version does not have an obsoletion note.
>> Moreover, in the "current work" page[2], CSS Print Profile is listed as "Com­pleted" rather than "Abandoned".
> 
> Seems to me that https://drafts.csswg.org/css-tv/ 's ED is also lacking the obsoletion notice. So we should add it, republish all 3 on TR to get the notice there, mark the Print Profile as Abandonned on the current work page, and exclude it from the TR index page.
> 

"At this time, the CSS Working Group does not envisage further work on this specification and does not plan to propose it as a W3C Recommendation."

This sentence in the Status section looks like obsoletion notice to me. Are you suggesting that we need to make it clearer?

Thanks,

Fuqiao
Received on Friday, 7 September 2018 06:39:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 7 September 2018 06:39:50 UTC