- From: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 08:32:06 +0100
- To: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
Also sprach Daniel Glazman: > 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? This functionality went to CR more than 9 years ago: http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/CR-css3-page-20040225/ According to the Process document, "Candiated Recommendation" is, specifically, a "Call for Implementations". http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#cfi So, why do you think implementing CSS3-PAGE is bad for process? -h&kon Håkon Wium Lie CTO °þe®ª howcome@opera.com http://people.opera.com/howcome
Received on Friday, 22 February 2013 07:32:40 UTC