Re: Is calc really at-risk

On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 5:03 AM, Rob Crowther <> wrote:
> On 17/10/2014 12:32, Chris Lilley wrote:
>> Wide support means that interoperability is proved by passing all the
>> tests, not that we guess that maybe it is fully implemented.
> There don't appear to be any tests for CSS Values and Units Module Level 3
> at  If this is the
> criteria for features being at risk why are ‘calc()’, ‘toggle()’ and
> ‘attr()’ the only ones mentioned on the spec?

We're not consistent in applying our "At Risk" criteria.  We just use
it when we think there might be interop problems when it's time to
exit CR, so we can drop them without having to cycle through Last Call
again.  ("At Risk" is a term of art in the W3C Spec Process which
means that removing the feature won't count as a "significant change"
for the purpose of advancing to the Proposed Rec stage.)


Received on Friday, 17 October 2014 17:54:23 UTC