Re: [CSSWG] CSS Level 2 now has a public Editor’s Draft

On 06/03/2014 09:39, Jens O. Meiert wrote:
> Simon, all,
> is there a chance we refer to CSS 1, CSS 2, and CSS 2.1 as CSS 1, CSS
> 2, and CSS 2.1, and everything else (CSS 3, “CSS 4,” &c.) as “CSS”?
> In other words, could we please just wrap up CSS 2.1 (as CSS 2.1, and
> not CSS 2, and not CSS) and then leave everything prior to “CSS 3”
> alone?
> Because it seems we somewhat switched from a versioning model to a
> living standard model, and going back and retrofitting old specs
> appears to increase confusion, not clarity.
> That, I think, will enable us to refer to CSS just as CSS faster than
> if we were to tamper with old concepts (and the ideas of CSS 1, CSS 2,
> and CSS 2.1 are old and firmly anchored concepts).

I think it helps to distinguish CSS the language, and the documents that 
specify it. The former effectively does not have versions nor levels. 
The latter do have levels for reasons that IMO are a combination of 
historical and W3C Process.

Nowadays, these document levels each only apply to a single “module” 
(eg. Selectors Level 4, Flexbox Level 1), not to the language as a whole.

I perceive “CSS 3” as a buzzword for “stuff that’s less than ten years 
old”. I prefer not to use it, and use just “CSS” instead. As we’ve 
discussed before, there is no such thing as “CSS 4”.

CSS 1 (the document), is entirely obsolete and superseded by CSS 2 
(which is the name I use to encompass 2.0, 2.1, and any future 2.x 
document we may publish.)

I would love to make CSS 2 (the document) obsolete as well and move on. 
Unfortunately, significant parts of it are not superseded by newer 
specifications yet. It is still the reference today for implementing eg. 
floats and abspos in Servo. As long as this is the case, we (the CSS WG) 
should continue to maintain this document and fix issues, at least in 
the parts that do not have a replacement yet. I try to maintain a 
mapping here:

I’ve considered pushing to publish the missing parts as independent “CSS 
XYZ Module Level 2” documents. No new feature, no rewrite; the point is 
only to make the big CSS 2 document obsolete. I don’t know if it’s worth 
the effort, what do you think?

Simon Sapin

Received on Thursday, 6 March 2014 10:38:07 UTC