- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2011 08:14:23 -0800
- To: Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@kozea.fr>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 2:11 AM, Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@kozea.fr> wrote: > Le 01/12/2011 00:23, Tab Atkins Jr. a écrit : >>> So when Lists 3 is ready, it will make the matching parts of CSS 2.1 >>> > obsolete and these parts won’t get corrections or clarifications? >> Yes, unless there's something obviously wrong or confusing in 2.1. > > So when I find something unclear or under-specified in 2.1, it’s not worth > reporting unless it’s really wrong as it will not get corrected? Not at all. If it's not yet covered by a level 3 module, we'll definitely correct it in 2.1. >>> > When parts of a spec is obsolete, should it be marked as such with a >>> > link to >>> > the new spec? >> >> We haven't generally done so with 2.1. As I said above, implementors >> are expected to be reading the most updated version of the specs. >> This can be seen somewhat easily by looking at >> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/, and will be even easier once we get the new >> Current Work page back up, which lists all the specs by maturity >> level. > > I guess that this Current Work page will also list which specs are relevant > or not? I was gonna use css3-content as an example but I just saw that the > editor’s draft has a big red obsoletion notice. However the current version > has no such warning. Nothing other that its age (2003) shows that it is any > less relevant than Lists 3 as they have the same status (Working Draft). Yes, it will. Also, the obsoletion notice *should* have made it onto the WD pages by now. I'll poke the relevant people again to get it done. > Also, most CSS3 modules are much bigger than the matching parts of CSS 2.1. > As the implementer of WeasyPrint, I try to keep some sanity and start by > only implementing 2.1. I only look at parts of CSS3 as I need them. (eg. I > have @page { size: … } but not the rest of Paged Media yet.) That's fine, but it's not a use-case we explicitly support. You will occasionally have problems unless you also read the latest module (when it exists for the given feature). ~TJ
Received on Thursday, 1 December 2011 16:15:19 UTC