- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 23:46:52 -0500
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 02/09/2016 08:17 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 6:39 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: >> Overall, the spec looks really good. I think we should take a cut of >> it and ship Level 4 with everything that we're sure is stable, since >> I think that's probably a lot of it. I just raised a few issues, but >> they should be straightforward to solve imho, being mostly syntactic. >> I say let's solve those, fill out 2.5. Combining Media Features, and >> publish an LCWD. >> >> Stuff I vaguely remember (or are noted in the draft) as not being >> 100% sorted as to whether they're the right approach: >> - light-level >> - inverted-colors >> - custom MQ >> >> These I think should be deferred to Level 4 so as not to hold up the >> rest of the features, some of which are desperately needed (like >> pointer and hover). And of course we should continue to actively >> work on them, and fold in the prefer-* stuff that's quite closely >> related, use case wise, to the first two. > > We should definitively cut custom MQ from this level. > > I think inverted-colors is fine. It's simple, and addresses a > realistic need presented in iOS devices. I'm concerned that as we investigate related a11y queries, we may end up wanting a different design. I don't think this is a particularly urgent need that it absolutely must make this level, so I would prefer to defer and design it together with other a11y color related features. > What problem do you have with light-level? Aside from the "should we > also map a11y concerns to this", I think the feature itself is 100% > stable and well-designed. That's exactly my concern. :) https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2016Feb/0295.html ~fantasai
Received on Thursday, 25 February 2016 04:47:24 UTC