- From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <noreply@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2026 17:12:26 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
The CSS Working Group just discussed `Republishing Tasks Permathread`, and agreed to the following: * `RESOLVED: new CRD for MQ4` * `RESOLVED: Publish new WD of MQ5` * `RESOLVED: Publish new WD of Rhythm 1` * `RESOLVED: Publish FPWD of Selectors 5` <details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary> <TabAtkins> SebastianZ: I added a bunch more specs that should get republished<br> <TabAtkins> SebastianZ: I also did the Change sections for them, and updated the WPT coverage in them<br> <TabAtkins> SebastianZ: four specs<br> <TabAtkins> SebastianZ: MQ4, MQ5, Rhythm 1, and last will be Selectors 5<br> <TabAtkins> SebastianZ: for MQ4 it's a new CRD, MQ5 it's a WD, Rhythm it's a WD, for Selectors 5 will be FPWD<br> <ChrisL> +1 to all of these<br> <TabAtkins> astearns: taking them in turn. MQ4 we already have a Cr, this is just an updated draft?<br> <TabAtkins> astearns: tab, you're an editor, you're okay with it?<br> <TabAtkins> TabAtkins: yes<br> <TabAtkins> astearns: objections to publishing?<br> <TabAtkins> RESOLVED: new CRD for MQ4<br> <TabAtkins> astearns: now regular WD of MQ5<br> <TabAtkins> TabAtkins: again okay with this<br> <TabAtkins> astearns: objections to publishing?<br> <TabAtkins> RESOLVED: Publish new WD of MQ5<br> <TabAtkins> astearns: next is updated WD of Rhythm<br> <TabAtkins> fantasai: i'm not sure what the changes are, but I don't think the draft is in a bad state<br> <TabAtkins> astearns: objections to publishing?<br> <TabAtkins> RESOLVED: Publish new WD of Rhythm 1<br> <TabAtkins> astearns: finally, FPWD of Selectors 5<br> <TabAtkins> ChrisL: the stuff from 4 got moved into this so it's ready to go<br> <TabAtkins> fantasai: I think we should publish 4 and 5 concurrently<br> <TabAtkins> ChrisL: can't, because 4 is already up-to-date published last week<br> <TabAtkins> SebastianZ: it was just waiting for the horizontal review request, Chris did it<br> <TabAtkins> astearns: objections to FPWD of Selectors 5?<br> <TabAtkins> keithamus: can I talk about :local-link? it still needs more time worked on<br> <TabAtkins> keithamus: the rest of the spec has wide consensus but :local-link is more experimental<br> <TabAtkins> fantasai: that's fine, we can still work on it. this i sjust first public<br> <TabAtkins> astearns: it's easier to drop from the draft, in fact, if we end up deciding to<br> <TabAtkins> keithamus: there are other things like the reference combinator...<br> <TabAtkins> SebastianZ: that shoudln't block FPWD, yeah<br> <TabAtkins> fantasai: FPWD is when it's at the point the spec is developed enough that it's worth looking at outside the WG. should be early in the process.<br> <TabAtkins> astearns: any objections to publishing?<br> <TabAtkins> RESOLVED: Publish FPWD of Selectors 5<br> </details> -- GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6900#issuecomment-3885792167 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 11 February 2026 17:12:27 UTC