- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 12:03:59 -0700
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 05/21/2012 06:11 PM, Sylvain Galineau wrote: > > [Tab Atkins Jr.:] >> >> The Lists 3 module has been sitting at WD for several months now, because >> a few pieces (mostly marker positioning) need more review before I'm >> comfortable requesting LC for it. (By the way, review marker positioning >> so I can request LC for it!) >> >> However, fantasai pointed out in private conversation during the f2f that >> the @counter-style part of the spec has received decent review and >> interest, and could proceed independently of the stuff about marker >> positioning and the like. >> >> Would anyone object if I pulled the @counter-style and symbols() function >> out into a separate spec that I could then request LC for? I could >> perhaps push it into the http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-counter-styles/ spec >> so we could have a proper argument over what styles to make normatively >> required again. >> ^_^ >> > How much work would you estimate is left for marker positioning that it > Justifies spinning up a new draft, getting FWPW etc. ? I guess I'm not > sure why y you wouldn't move the marker positioning to L4 and LC > the rest now? I think the marker positioning aspects are fairly unstable, given they haven't been reviewed in depth by anyone except Tab, afaik. We already have a resolution on the books to split the draft into a counter-styles module and a lists module, so spinning up a new draft is already required. Tab's just proposing to shift @counter-style into the counter-styles module, alongside the counter style definitions. ~fantasai
Received on Tuesday, 22 May 2012 19:04:50 UTC