- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 13:19:57 -0800
- To: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
- CC: Peter Linss <peter.linss@hp.com>, Peter Moulder <peter.moulder@monash.edu>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On 03/03/2011 11:24 AM, Sylvain Galineau wrote: > [Peter Linss:] >> On Mar 2, 2011, at 10:56 PM, Peter Moulder wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 03:48:49AM +0000, Linss, Peter wrote: >>>> CSS 2.1 has been in the pipeline for far too long, many other specs >>>> normatively depend on it and it needs to be a REC to unblock progress >>>> in other areas. >>> >>> What other specs are those, and what bits of CSS2.1 do they depend on? >> >> How about every other CSS module? EPUB? There are many others, listing >> them isn't the point, there are dependencies, period. We need to move 2.1 >> forward and stop futzing with it. It'll never be perfect, that's what >> errata are for. > > Quick example: CSS3 Selectors remains PR until CSS2.1 reaches REC. CSS3 > Backgrounds& Borders is another well-known module that could find itself > in the same situation. I doubt CSS3 Backgrounds and Borders will make it to PR anytime soon, as it doesn't have a test suite. But Selectors, Namespaces, and Color are held up on CSS2.1. And that's only within W3C. The official "status" of CSS2.1 prevents it from being used as a reference for standards outside W3C -- such organizations are referencing CSS2.0, because it is supposedly more "stable". ~fantasai
Received on Thursday, 3 March 2011 21:20:38 UTC