- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 19:13:10 -0500
- To: "www-archive@w3.org" <www-archive@w3.org>
For public archive, in case anyone else wants to use Chris Lilley's template. :p ~fantasai -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: [css-flexbox] Transition Request, CSS Flexible Box Layout Level 1 to CR (updated) Resent-Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2015 00:08:03 +0000 Resent-From: w3c-css-wg@w3.org Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 19:07:17 -0500 From: fantasai Hello PLH, This is a transition request for CSS Flexible Box Layout Level 1 to Candidate Recommendation. * Document title, URIs, and estimated publication date - CSS Flexible Box Layout Module Level 1 - ED at http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-flexbox-1/ - The Tuesday or Thursday after a successful transition meeting (or decision) * The document Abstract and Status sections http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-flexbox-1/#abstract http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-flexbox-1/#status * Decision to request transition RESOLVED: Take Flexbox to CR https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2015Dec/0233.html * Changes See http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-flexbox-1/#changes * Requirements satisfied No requirements document. * Dependencies met (or not) - CSS2.1 - REC - CSS Fragmentation - CR - CSS Cascade - CR - CSS Images - CR - CSS Writing Modes - CR - CSS Values - CR - CSS Sizing - WD (mainly for terminology) Non-dependent normative references: - CSS Display - WD (point at interaction with new 'display' values therein) - CSS Multicol - CR (define non-interaction with multicol properties) - CSS UI - CR (define interaction with UI's box-sizing) * Wide Review The document went through a (2005 process) Last Call in 2012, and then transitioned to CR. It was returned to LC in 2014 to process further comments due from implementation experience (per 2005 process rules), and cycled through three additional LC drafts, procuring numerous comments, both on the changes themselves and also on additional problems found. These are documented in the corresponding Dispositions of Comments. The rate of substantive comments has declined over the last year, resulting in enough stability to zero out the open issues and request a transition back to CR. http://drafts.csswg.org/css-flexbox-1/issues-cr-2012 http://drafts.csswg.org/css-flexbox-1/issues-lc-20140325 http://drafts.csswg.org/css-flexbox-1/issues-lc-20140925 http://drafts.csswg.org/css-flexbox-1/issues-lc-20150514 * Issues addressed See above * Formal Objections None, but see https://drafts.csswg.org/css-flexbox/issues-lc-20150514#issue-11 The CSSWG was unable to come to a consensus (a first in over a decade, IIRC), and so we followed Ralph Swick's advice to record both behaviors as allowed, with the hope that implementations will eventually converge and the spec updated to match. * Implementation Aside from pagination, which is reported to be pretty poor, Flexbox is thoroughly implemented in Gecko, Blink & Webkit, Trident/Edge, and even Presto. Bugfixes are ongoing, as implementations are not yet perfectly compliant. A test suite is in development and currently has 660 tests written by a variety of contributors. Missing tests will be added and implementations further tested during the CR period. * Patent disclosures (none) http://www.w3.org/2004/01/pp-impl/32061/status ~fantasai
Received on Thursday, 31 December 2015 00:13:43 UTC