W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > November 2011

Re: [css3-lists] remove "Complex Counter Styles" and "Optional Extended Counter Styles" sections

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2011 01:22:20 -0800
Message-ID: <4ED2014C.4000508@inkedblade.net>
To: www-style@w3.org
On 11/24/2011 04:43 PM, John Daggett wrote:
> I think section 12, "Optional Extended Counter Styles" should be marked
> with a similar issue about whether it makes sense to spec out "optional"
> features such as these.

Whether to have section 12 and whether to mark it optional was already
discussed and resolved in May.

    - RESOLVED: Define cjk longhand list numbering up to 100,000
                with fallback to cjk-decimal beyond, allow UAs to
                implement longhand beyond that limit, put definition
                for that in informative appendix.


> I feel strongly that in the context of simple
> lists it doesn't make sense to be proposing this, as either a required
> or optional feature.  At a minimum I think it should be pushed out to
> the next version of the module, the working group's time would be much
> better spent reviewing, refining and working out the fine details (along
> with tests!!!!) of @counter-style and the other proposals for simple
> lists.

What is the point of pushing it out to the next level if the spec work
is already done and the feature is marked at-risk?

Received on Sunday, 27 November 2011 09:22:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:07 UTC