- From: Jo Rabin <jrabin@mtld.mobi>
- Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 10:46:58 +0100
- To: <public-bpwg@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: public-bpwg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-bpwg-request@w3.org] On > Behalf Of Francois Daoust > Sent: 25 April 2008 10:37 > To: public-bpwg@w3.org > Subject: ISSUE-231 [again]: MINIMIZE and whitespace in CSS > > > Apologies to bring up an issue that was resolved last week [1]... but ;-) > > My understanding of the decision to postpone counting whitespace in CSS > was twofold: > 1. because we didn't want to introduce any substantive change to the > document. > 2. because we didn't want to make too many changes in the document > itself to have it out ASAP. > > For 1., it's already too late, we introduced some substantive changes > with resolution on ISSUE-234, and we're to publish the doc in Last Call > again. > For 2., since the code is already dormant in the code, I thought it was > merely a question of activating it and performing minor edition updates > (and Jo so much loves edition that he probably would welcome some more > work in that area ;-)), but then I remembered the discussion on the It so happens that a new version of mobileOK Basic is already lurking in the wings, however for some reason I can't run Dom's HTMLDiff tool on it to sanity check it. I'd be delighted to modify it further if that was what the group wanted, of course! > definition of whitespaces in CSS [2], and realize it probably isn't that > easy to handle it correctly, and would involve not-so-trivial changes in > the doc as well as in the checker code, and its associated test suites... > > Anyway, I'm raising this on the mailing-list as agreed during this > week's call [3]: > Given that 1. doesn't stand anymore, should we reconsider our > decision > to postpone counting whitespace in CSS? > > If in favor, stand up, clap your hands, and reply. > If against it, let this thread die or vehemently oppose. > Because of 2., I don't think this is such a good idea anymore and > cowardly vote 0 to my own proposal... For the reasons you state it's a -1 from me. Jo > > References: > [1] http://www.w3.org/2008/04/17-bpwg-minutes.html#item02 > [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2008Jan/0048.html > [3] http://www.w3.org/2008/04/24-bpwg-minutes.html#item03
Received on Friday, 25 April 2008 09:47:48 UTC