- From: Elika Etemad via cvs-syncmail <cvsmail@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 18:35:27 +0000
- To: public-css-commits@w3.org
Update of /sources/public/csswg/css-2010
In directory hutz:/tmp/cvs-serv21954
Modified Files:
Overview.html Overview.src.html
Log Message:
Update wording for CSS2.1 PR, add in Sylvain's proposal for prefix dropping
Index: Overview.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /sources/public/csswg/css-2010/Overview.html,v
retrieving revision 1.5
retrieving revision 1.6
diff -u -d -r1.5 -r1.6
--- Overview.html 1 Dec 2010 15:32:12 -0000 1.5
+++ Overview.html 25 Apr 2011 18:35:25 -0000 1.6
@@ -15,12 +15,12 @@
<h1>Cascading Style Sheets (CSS) Snapshot 2010</h1>
- <h2 class="no-num no-toc" id=w3c-working-draft-date>W3C Working Draft 01
- December 2010</h2>
+ <h2 class="no-num no-toc" id=w3c-working-draft-date>W3C Working Draft 25
+ April 2011</h2>
<dl>
<dt>This version:</dt>
- <!-- <dd><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-css-2010-20101201">http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/ED-css-2010-20101201</a></dd> -->
+ <!-- <dd><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-css-2010-20110425">http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/ED-css-2010-20110425</a></dd> -->
<dd><a
href="http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-2010/">http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-2010/</a>
@@ -33,7 +33,11 @@
<dt>Previous version:
- <dd>-
+ <dd><a
+ href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-css-2010-20101202/">http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-css-2010-20101202/</a>
+
+
+ <dd><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/css-beijing/">2007 Snapshot</a>
<dt>Editor:
@@ -42,7 +46,7 @@
<!--begin-copyright-->
<p class=copyright><a
href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/ipr-notice#Copyright"
- rel=license>Copyright</a> © 2010 <a
+ rel=license>Copyright</a> © 2011 <a
href="http://www.w3.org/"><acronym title="World Wide Web
Consortium">W3C</acronym></a><sup>®</sup> (<a
href="http://www.csail.mit.edu/"><acronym title="Massachusetts Institute
@@ -110,10 +114,6 @@
comments</strong> is <strong>????</strong>.
-->
- <p>This is the first public working draft of the 2010 snapshot of CSS. The
- <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/css-beijing/">previous snapshot</a> was for
- 2007.
-
<h2 class="no-num no-toc" id=contents>Table of contents</h2>
<!--begin-toc-->
@@ -143,6 +143,9 @@
<li><a href="#experimental"><span class=secno>3.3. </span>Experimental
Implementations</a>
+
+ <li><a href="#testing"><span class=secno>3.4. </span>Non-Experimental
+ Implementations</a>
</ul>
</ul>
<!--end-toc-->
@@ -267,16 +270,16 @@
instead of expanding an already <a
href="http://www.w3.org/Style/css2-updates/REC-CSS2-19980512-errata.html">unwieldy
errata list</a>, the CSS Working Group chose to define <cite>CSS Level 2
- Revision 1</cite> (CSS2.1).
+ Revision 1</cite> (CSS2.1). In case of any conflict between the two specs
+ CSS2.1 contains the definitive definition.
- <p>CSS2.1 is now a Candidate Recommendation—effectively though not
- officially the same level of stability as CSS2—and should be
- considered to obsolete the CSS2 Recommendation. In case of any conflict
- between the two specs CSS2.1 contains the definitive definition. Features
- in CSS2 that were dropped from CSS2.1 should be considered to be at the
- Candidate Recommendation stage, but note that many of these have been or
- will be pulled into a CSS Level 3 working draft, in which case that
- specification will, once it reaches CR, obsolete the definitions in CSS2.
+ <p>Once CSS2.1 became Candidate Recommendation—effectively though not
+ officially the same level of stability as CSS2—obsoleted the CSS2
+ Recommendation. Features in CSS2 that were dropped from CSS2.1 should be
+ considered to be at the Candidate Recommendation stage, but note that many
+ of these have been or will be pulled into a CSS Level 3 working draft, in
+ which case that specification will, once it reaches CR, obsolete the
+ definitions in CSS2.
<p>The <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/">CSS2.1 specification</a>
defines <dfn id=css-level-2>CSS Level 2</dfn> and the <a
@@ -302,24 +305,18 @@
<h2 id=css><span class=secno>3. </span>Cascading Style Sheets Definition</h2>
<p>As of 2010, <dfn id=cascading-style-sheets-css>Cascading Style Sheets
- (CSS)</dfn> is defined by the following specifications. Each specification
- in this list builds on and possibly modifies the definitions in the
- previous specifications, with the base formed by <cite>CSS Level 2
- Revision 1</cite>. (In other words, CSS is defined as <cite>CSS Level 2
- Revision 1</cite>, modified by <cite>CSS Namespaces</cite>, modified by
- <cite>Selectors Level 3</cite>, etc.) A valid CSS document is one that
- conforms to this definition.
+ (CSS)</dfn> is defined by the following specifications.
<ol>
<li><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/">CSS Level 2 Revision 1</a>
(including errata)
- <li><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-mediaqueries/">Media Queries Level
- 3</a>
-
<li><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/css-style-attr/">CSS Style
Attributes</a>
+ <li><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-mediaqueries/">Media Queries Level
+ 3</a>
+
<li><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-namespace/">CSS Namespaces</a>
<li><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-selectors/">Selectors Level 3</a>
@@ -330,8 +327,8 @@
<h3 id=partial><span class=secno>3.1. </span>Partial Implementations</h3>
<p>So that authors can exploit the forward-compatible parsing rules to
- assign fallback values, CSS layout implementations <strong>must</strong>
- treat as invalid (and <a
+ assign fallback values, CSS renderers <strong>must</strong> treat as
+ invalid (and <a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/conform.html#ignore">ignore as
appropriate</a>) any at-rules, properties, property values, keywords, and
other syntactic constructs for which they have no usable level of support.
@@ -370,3 +367,18 @@
specification reaches the Candidate Recommendation stage, implementors
should implement the non-prefixed syntax for any feature they consider to
be correctly implemented according to spec.
+
+ <h3 id=testing><span class=secno>3.4. </span>Non-Experimental
+ Implementations</h3>
+
+ <p>To establish and maintain the interoperability of CSS across
+ implementations, the CSS Working Group requests that non-experimental CSS
+ renderers submit an implementation report (and, if necessary, the
+ testcases used for that implementation report) to the W3C before releasing
+ an unprefixed implementation of any CSS features. CSS2.1 implementations
+ are encouraged, but not required, to submit such a report.
+
+ <p>Further information on submitting testcases and implementation reports
+ can be found from on the CSS Working Group's website at <a
+ href="http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/">http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/</a>.
+
Index: Overview.src.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /sources/public/csswg/css-2010/Overview.src.html,v
retrieving revision 1.6
retrieving revision 1.7
diff -u -d -r1.6 -r1.7
--- Overview.src.html 3 Mar 2011 08:22:41 -0000 1.6
+++ Overview.src.html 25 Apr 2011 18:35:25 -0000 1.7
@@ -21,7 +21,8 @@
<dt>Latest version:</dt>
<dd><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/css-2010/">http://www.w3.org/TR/css-2010/</a></dd>
<dt>Previous version:</dt>
- <dd>-
+ <dd><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-css-2010-20101202/">http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-css-2010-20101202/</a>
+ <dd><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/css-beijing/">2007 Snapshot</a>
<dt>Editor:</dt>
<dd><a href="http://fantasai.inkedblade.net/contact">Elika J. Etemad</a></dd>
</dl>
@@ -167,16 +168,16 @@
in the CSS2 specification, so instead of expanding an already <a
href="http://www.w3.org/Style/css2-updates/REC-CSS2-19980512-errata.html">unwieldy
errata list</a>, the CSS Working Group chose to define <cite>CSS Level 2
-Revision 1</cite> (CSS2.1).</p>
+Revision 1</cite> (CSS2.1). In case of any conflict between the two specs
+CSS2.1 contains the definitive definition.</p>
-<p>CSS2.1 is now a Candidate Recommendation—effectively though not
-officially the same level of stability as CSS2—and should be
-considered to obsolete the CSS2 Recommendation. In case of any conflict
-between the two specs CSS2.1 contains the definitive definition. Features
-in CSS2 that were dropped from CSS2.1 should be considered to be at the
-Candidate Recommendation stage, but note that many of these have been or
-will be pulled into a CSS Level 3 working draft, in which case that
-specification will, once it reaches CR, obsolete the definitions in CSS2.</p>
+<p>Once CSS2.1 became Candidate Recommendation—effectively though not
+officially the same level of stability as CSS2—obsoleted the CSS2
+Recommendation. Features in CSS2 that were dropped from CSS2.1 should be
+considered to be at the Candidate Recommendation stage, but note that many
+of these have been or will be pulled into a CSS Level 3 working draft, in
+which case that specification will, once it reaches CR, obsolete the
+definitions in CSS2.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/">CSS2.1 specification</a> defines
<dfn>CSS Level 2</dfn> and the <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/css-style-attr/">CSS
@@ -252,3 +253,17 @@
specification reaches the Candidate Recommendation stage, implementors
should implement the non-prefixed syntax for any feature they consider to
be correctly implemented according to spec.</p>
+
+<h3 id="testing">Non-Experimental Implementations</h3>
+
+<p>To establish and maintain the interoperability of CSS across
+implementations, the CSS Working Group requests that non-experimental
+CSS renderers submit an implementation report (and, if necessary, the
+testcases used for that implementation report) to the W3C before
+releasing an unprefixed implementation of any CSS features. CSS2.1
+implementations are encouraged, but not required, to submit such a
+report.
+
+<p>Further information on submitting testcases and implementation reports
+can be found from on the CSS Working Group's website at
+<a href="http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/">http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/</a>.
Received on Monday, 25 April 2011 18:35:30 UTC