- From: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
- Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2011 10:36:18 +0100
- To: www-style@w3.org
Le 01/12/11 10:13, Brian Manthos a écrit : > From the IRC log _http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/css/20111130_... > I get the impression that Fantasai updated the syntax yet again, and it > was immediately resolved to move the new syntax to WD with > little-to-no-vetting of the changes after less than 24hr of the edit. > Given that it took over a week – and significant time investment – to > reach the ED syntax that was there before 11/29, and there was zero > discussion on that syntax proposal prior to the 11/29 edit over a 3 week > period .... isn’t it overly aggressive, or rather premature, to > immediately kick that new edit to WD? > I kind of feel like my time was wasted. > I haven’t even seen the new proposed grammar but I am already suspect > that it likely has issues given that it is being rushed. In previous > “rushes” of this module, I’ve typically found at least 2 issues. > I’ll try to review the 11/29 edits to the ED tomorrow or the next day, > other work priorities allowing. Fantasai updated the document following a resolution of the Group during yesterday's conference call. We also resolved as WG to release a new WD [1]. That said, a WD is only a WD, ie something we make public while an ED is only a view of what's in the editing tool of the maintainer of the document. A WD is still strictly experimental, subject to changes and even more important something the Working Group releases to the public as a request for comments. So no worries here, your comments are logged, read, taken under account, and you still have all opportunity to comment on the syntax. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Nov/0814.html </Daniel> -- W3C CSS Working Group, Co-chair
Received on Thursday, 1 December 2011 09:36:50 UTC