Re: HTML plan

On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 05:37:03 +0100, Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>  
wrote:

>
>> On Jan 20, 2016, at 08:04, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Léonie Watson <tink@tink.uk> wrote:
>>> One approach to test modularisation is to encourage people working on a
>>> specific section to split it out from the "main" HTML specification,  
>>> move it
>>> independently to Recommendation, so that it can be referenced  
>>> normatively
>>> from the base specification. This way we can get some experience of the
>>> process without undertaking a massive project before we really know the
>>> costs and benefits.
>>
>> This is "the CSS process", and it's worked well for the past decade
>> (with CSS 2.1 serving as the big monolithic base, and modules
>> gradually carving chunks of it out and levelling them independently).
>
> Well, sorta.

Yes. We pretty shamelessly copied from it, although as you note we expect  
to do things slightly differently, revising the core specification as a  
whole.

cheers

> Assuming "the base specification" in "so that it can be referenced  
> normatively from the base specification" means the monolithic HTML5.x  
> spec, there's a difference between "the CSS process" and what I'm  
> reading in Léonie's mail.
>
> CSS 3+ Modules reference (and often override) CSS2.1 and move along  
> independently on the REC track, but they do not get referred to  
> normatively FROM CSS2.x. It's the other way around.
>
> Modulo errata, CSS2.1 is meant to stay as it is. Other modules get  
> written on (mostly) self contained topics. Whether they merely complete  
> the CSS2.1 base specification, or whether they replace some sections of  
> it is made explicit somewhere near the beginning of each document.
>
> There is no particular need to refer to these new independent modules  
> FROM the base spec. Eventually, the CSSWG will produce a CSS2.x spec  
> with all the bits that have been overridden by newer modules removed,  
> and it will probably include pointers to where these parts have moved  
> to, but won't be meant as the base spec from which you can find  
> everything.
>
>  - Florian


-- 
Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
  chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com

Received on Wednesday, 20 January 2016 13:56:55 UTC