W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2018

Re: [csswg] Agenda conf call 10-Jan-2018

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 17:36:48 +0200
To: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <32bddbd0-c941-5955-43b2-4d78828b5e55@w3.org>
Hi folks,

Since I agenda+'ed a ton of css-font* issues, I should explain why and 
what I want to achieve.

The last CR publication of CSS Fonts 3 was in 2013. Since then we have:

- greatly improved implementations
- more thorough tests
- a better idea of what is at risk and what should get bumped to Level 4

So we resolved to publish an updated CR. Transition request in progress:
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/blob/master/css-fonts-3/transition-cr-2017.md

However, that requires a disposition of comments for all comments made 
2013-2017. We didn't have one, so I went digging and put one together:
https://drafts.csswg.org/issues.html?spec=css-fonts-3&doc=cr-2017

These agenda items are to deal with comments that were seemingly not 
addressed. I am fine with any of the following resolutions to each 
(remember this is for updated CR not PR, though I hope PR is not too far 
away):

- we solve the issue and resolve not to change the spec
- we solve the issue and make editorial changes to the spec
- we solve the issue, make substantive changes, and add tests for them
- we leave the issue open and republic CR noting this is still open
- we resolve to move the affected feature to Level 4 (I hope not too 
many of these)

That will let me update the disposition of comments and thus request 
updated CR transition.

On 10-Jan-18 02:55, Alan Stearns wrote:
> 1. [css-fonts] Handle language/family dependent cascading of keyword font-size values
>      https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1835
>
> 2. [css-fonts] Do generic fonts resolve to a single font face value?
>      https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1736
>
> 3. [css-fonts] Make larger/smaller simple ratios
>      https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1711
>
> 4. [css-fonts] [cssom] Serialization of font properties when system font is specified
>      https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1586
>
> 5. [css-fonts-4] Should the OpenType spec dictate the acceptable values for variable font CSS properties?
>      https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1531
>
> 6. [css-fonts-3] Default feature list should not require a list of features to turn on
>      https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1267
>
> 7. [css-font] Clarify what value is invalid for font-language-override and why it shouldn't generate parse error
>      https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1104
>
> 8. [css-fonts] Grammar of <feature-value-name
>      https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1000
>
-- 
Chris Lilley
@svgeesus
Technical Director @ W3C
W3C Strategy Team, Core Web Design
W3C Architecture & Technology Team, Core Web & Media
Received on Wednesday, 10 January 2018 15:39:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 10 January 2018 15:39:15 UTC