- From: Chris Lilley via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 17:20:57 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Comments from Ralph Swick: > Two questions, Chris. These are probably best addressed in WG discussion. > 1. What is holding up FPWD for CSS Overflow 4? An FPWD can state what parts are less (or more) stable but a CR shouldn't depend upon something that is only an editors' draft, especially if the pertinent definitions have been improved. > 2. Security considerations should include something about risks and counter-measures if a bad actor misuses these new features; e.g. to alter (and misrepresent) what is rendered to the user. > Would it be appropriate to have some test cases that misuse the features and test what the implementation does in those situations? -- GitHub Notification of comment by svgeesus Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1374#issuecomment-301542566 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 15 May 2017 17:21:04 UTC