- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 15:26:32 +0100
- To: www-style@w3.org, Etan Wexler <ewexler@stickdog.com>
- CC: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
On Friday, February 28, 2003, 9:49:26 AM, Etan wrote: EW> Chris Lilley wrote to <www-styl@w3.org> on 2003-02-27 09:36 in "Re: CSS1 is EW> obsolete" (<mid:71233171.20030227183632@w3.org>): >> IH> Is HTML 3.2 "deprecated, [obsolete], or historical"? >> >> No, but it should be and I would like to see [it] demoted from a >> Recommendation. EW> A quick read of the W3C Process document reveals that this cannot be done as EW> such [REC]: EW> In this version of the Process Document, there are no EW> maturity level changes after Recommendation; a technical EW> report remains a Recommendation indefinitely. A change to the process is nevertheless possible, and I have been discussing such a change. This would seem cleaner than producing, for example, an empty or near empty 'Recommendation' that says This doctype shall not be used. or similar. EW> The Working Group could use CSS3 modules to retire levels 1 and 2 or could EW> issue dedicated retirement Reccomendations. The process for producing such EW> retirement Recommendations is as for any other Recommendation [TR], so I EW> believe and support Chris when he writes that the deprecation is the EW> responsibility of the Working Group. Thanks. -- Chris mailto:chris@w3.org
Received on Friday, 28 February 2003 09:26:38 UTC