W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2017

Re: [CSS2] Proposed process for maintaining CSS2

From: Liam R. E. Quin <liam@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2017 00:59:06 -0500
Message-ID: <1486015146.30907.12.camel@w3.org>
To: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
Cc: Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>, Stephen Zilles <szilles@adobe.com>
On Thu, 2017-02-02 at 13:57 +0900, Florian Rivoal wrote:
> > 
> We could do that, but the problem is that we kind of know for sure
> that
> some edits aren't ready. Presumably they will be eventually, but that
> could
> take a fairly long time.

So make a 3rd edition when they're ready. In the meantime include (in
the document) notes on the areas that aren't ready that point to an ED?

> This Note would effectively be a working draft in the plain english
> sense, as it's the
> draft we work with, but it would not be a Working Draft in the
> Process sense,
> as it is not a document we intend to move along the REC track.

I'd be much happier seeing it be on the rec track so that patent
commitments apply.

Thanks for replying. Maybe if I'd been able to go to Seattle I'd be OK
with this, but as it is I'm trying to see if we can't use the existing
Process a little more efficiently.

Received on Thursday, 2 February 2017 05:59:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:09:06 UTC