W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2015

Re: [css-ui] Final review: small comments

From: Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 23:05:01 -0700
Message-ID: <CAEV2_WZCBnWQSPrFdyO=W=rktou2KjvAoz3z2HGAgunA_-0a0g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 8:32 AM, Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net> wrote:
> Hi Tantek,
> As we now have a resolution on all open issues, I though this would be
> a good time to go through the spec again to make sure everything is
> tight and ready for CR.
> Here are a few minor things I've found:
> 1) The abstract still mentions selectors, even though there are not
> longer any selectors in the spec

Indeed. Removed.

> 2) The list of features at risk includes
> "outline-offset property negative values", but this would be better
> listed as "constraints on outline-offset property negative values"
> to match what the text actually says

I don't think that matters but I also don't object to the extra text. Added.

> 3) Modules interactions lists what this spec supersedes. It should
> now include one extra item:
>  - Information on the stacking of outlines defined
>    in CSS 2.1 Appendix E http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/zindex.html

Added to the list of sections that are superseded from CSS2.1

> 4) We should now be able to remove
> "Issue 1: 69 box-sizing insufficiently specified for replaced elements."


> 5) http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-ui/#ellipsing-details states:
> "Ellipsing occurs after relative positioning and other graphical transformations"
> Given that ellipsis applies to inline text, and that transforms do not apply to
> inlines, what do "other graphical transformations" refer to? Let's either clarify
> or remove.

>From my recollection we deliberately agreed on this language when we
last discussed this at a f2f. I'd prefer to leave as-is, and if there
is a specific proposal for clarifying (e.g. based on implementer or
ideal behavior), it can be done in level 4.

> 6) There a missing closing </p> tag after PARAGRAPH in example 6,
> causing the sample rendering to be different from what the example
> claims it will be.

Note sure how that got dropped. Good catch.

> 7) The section on directional navigation has a note about welcoming
> feedback about the behavior for otherwise non focusable elements.
> Is the a WG or some other body that we could contact to request
> feedback from? A note in a spec is not a very proactive request
> for feedback.

That note roughly reflects what we agreed to after our discussions at
the Sydney f2f. We're not looking for feedback from a specific WG, but
rather as the note says, from implementers, and authors using those
properties. No change needed.

> I also have 5 more substantive comments which I will send in separate mails. Once we're done with that, and pending the edits for cursor formats, I think we will be pretty much ready for CR.

I'm ok with continuing to publish WDs until we're not finding issues.
Even if that means we publish the same thing twice just for a status
change, or perhaps we take the opportunity to add some more
non-normative (but illustrative) examples.


Received on Wednesday, 22 April 2015 06:06:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:30 UTC