Re: [csswg-drafts] Let’s Define CSS 4 (#4770)

> Calling the next collection of modules CSS4 has a few benefits over year names... 

@fantasai Yeah, I debated whether or not to use `a year name again even because, as I said - _many_ kinds of names could work, and I'm not actually trying to suggest one as much as that it _might_ be valuable to break with the current naming a to avoid confusion. Is that valid or valuable enough..... idk, honestly.  

> 99.9% of Authors have no idea that CSS is born in specs that have Module Level numbers.

@jensimmons  We spent a really long time publishing "there is no css4" stuff... Google returns a lot of pieces on this.  The actual drafts and MDN documentation and posts and presentations and talks that say 'level 4' or 'level 5' or whatever -- that's all I mean: There is lots of opportunity for confusion floating around out there already.  Again... does this really matter.. idk?

Please don't read too much into any of these replies: I don't feel super strongly on any of this and i'm definitely not trying to be argumentative about it.  I just wanted to make sure that my own worries/thoughts were properly expressed.  I fully agree that there are many very good points in this thread and I'm very happy to accept whatever the group/community decides here. 






-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by bkardell
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4770#issuecomment-586655919 using your GitHub account

Received on Sunday, 16 February 2020 00:40:46 UTC