- From: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 12:30:29 +0200
- To: www-style@w3.org
I am writing this message with multiple hats on my head and this is not an easy message to write: individual, Member of the W3C, and Co-chair of the CSS WG. I am not willing to make any discrimination below because I am unable to do so on such a emotional topic. The argument that a tribute has no place in a document released by the W3C has some value but Standards are written by humans and made for humans after all. The technical details we carefully iron have only one goal: allow a better Web for everyone, everywhere. Tributes are part of the human nature and human history. In that light, the human beings the CSS WG members are have decided to pay a tribute to another human being, and I fail seeing in which name or idea of purity Web Standards should be sanctuarized up to the point It Should Not Happen There. I had myself a few light concerns about adding this value to CSS Color Level 4, but clearly not to the point I could be objecting or even express a negative opinion. I support this as in individual and I'm happily willing to let my other hats hide this time. Even IETF has released at least two memorial RFCs after the passing of Jon Postel; yes, I know, these are informational RFCs but still, the whole IETF community and in particular the RFC Editor agreed that it was ok. This is similar here. Eric Meyer has been an invaluable contributor to CSS and the CSS WG. The CSS WG has decided to accept a proposal emerging from the community to add a new colour in memory of his daughter. Most browser vendors have expressed their support and will implement it. RFE bugs are already filed, patches are already in and waiting for the end of this CfC. Firefox, Servo, Safari, Chrome and IE will all implement this and I heard no objection from any member of the CSS WG. Tab is right when he says this CfC is for CSS WG Members. The CSS WG decided long ago to work entirely in the open. That does not mean our decision system has changed. The Members of the Group still decide based on consensus _in the Group_. I, as a Co-chair, have and don't want to have any impact on this. This is the difference between chairing and leading. The current CfC follows the rules of the CSS WG, I only decided to allow a very short call period because this is a very emotional topic, something so different from our daily duties. I will declare consensus based on Members' opinions, as Tab said, if no objection is raised before tonight 11:59pm pacific time, as announced earlier. Browser vendors will then check the patches in, as announced too, and I have no problem seeing that happen before an official Call for Implementations. In summary: from time to time, the human beings appear behind the geeks and we ask you to accept it. For once in its lifetime, the CSS WG does not make something for the whole globe, but only for our friends Eric and Kat Meyer. And for their daughter Rebecca and her love for #663399. Thank you. </Daniel>
Received on Friday, 20 June 2014 10:30:57 UTC