- From: Mike Bremford via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2022 12:02:28 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> We should probably just retire GCPM to Note status Please don't do this. Not yet. We're all aware that GCPM has issues but it's formed the basis for a number of independent implementations and has been largely unchanged for a decade. There is at least some compatibility across implementations as a result, and this has been the case for many years. There's cleanup to be done, certainly: in order to implement page number counters you need to consult Content-3, Lists-3 , Pages-3 but not GCPM-3. Bookmarks were moved to Content-3, despite not generating any content on the page while Page selectors _are_ in GCPM despite having nothing to do with content, and should probably be in Page-3. It needs more and better testcases (cough https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/21701) and it needs an editor. So I would also like to have a discussion on this, but with the goal of fixing it, not retiring it. If an editor is required for this and the WG would consider me for it I'd certainly like to know more about what's involved. I'll make sure I'm on the next call. What I don't want to do is make a case **specifically against retiring it**, rather than for improving it, on only a few days notice in the comments on an unrelated issue where the people that will be affected most are unlikely to see it. -- GitHub Notification of comment by faceless2 Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6435#issuecomment-1159705256 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Sunday, 19 June 2022 12:02:30 UTC