- From: MURAKAMI Shinyu <murakami@antenna.co.jp>
- Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 16:13:48 +0900
- To: www-style@w3.org
fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote on 2013/02/21 9:46:17 > On 02/20/2013 05:55 AM, Daniel Glazman wrote: > > > > The CSS WG is not responsible if vendors implement unstabilized features > > and if users of these vendors use the features. It says nothing about > > the quality of the solution they're using. It only says they use it. > > Good for YesLogic and AntennaHouse who shipped experimental features > > to the masses, bad for the W3C Process, something you should care about, > > right? > > CSS3 Page went to CR already. We pulled it back because so much of it > was poorly-defined, and the definitions thus need several rounds of > edits before we get them right. But the features themselves have not > changed much in design from the CR. > > ~fantasai We (AntennaHouse) implemented CSS3 Page with experimental features including a bit of GCPM, and hope these specifications will be improved and stabilized. Also I am interested in the discussion of the Paged Media Level 4 that I'll have to learn a lot. For your information: O'Reilly Media is building books with CSS3 Paged Media (using AntennaHouse). "EPUB 3 Best Practices" http://shop.oreilly.com/product/0636920024897.do is an example. There is an A List Apart article, "Building Books with CSS3" (by Nellie McKesson, O'Reilly Media, Inc.) http://www.alistapart.com/articles/building-books-with-css3/ and a presentation at the recent O'Reilly's event TOC 2013, "CSS3 (and HTML!) for Publishers" (Nellie McKesson) http://www.toccon.com/toc2013/public/schedule/detail/26714 Regards, Shinyu Murakami Antenna House
Received on Thursday, 21 February 2013 07:14:26 UTC