- From: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>
- Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 18:40:34 +0200
- To: www-style@w3.org
- CC: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
On 13/05/2012 15:20, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > On 5/13/12 5:44 AM, Anton Prowse wrote: >> There isn't much alternative to this, > > Well, in fairness there is: Whenever such a limitation of CSS2.1 is hit, > errata CSS2.1 as needed and publish the updated version quickly. As in, > move it to more of a "living spec" model. As long as the changes are > just adding new definition hooks, this should be pretty safe in terms of > not making existing implementations non-compliant (a common complaint > about the "living spec" model), have low overhead, and not block other > specs too much. A fair point. I should have been more careful and said that "within the current modus operandi of the group...". Actually, I rather like the idea of a "living spec" when it's done through errata so that changes can be versioned. Cheers, Anton Prowse http://dev.moonhenge.net
Received on Sunday, 13 May 2012 16:41:03 UTC