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

Re: Retiring Obsolete CSS Notes

From: Fuqiao Xue <xfq@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2018 12:16:04 +0800
To: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
Cc: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, Rossen Atanassov <Rossen.Atanassov@microsoft.com>, Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>, W3C www-style mailing list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <e0efef05cfa6edde76f1156e08cbc669@w3.org>
On 2018-09-06 23:49, Florian Rivoal wrote:
> Hi all,
> PLH and I were talking about obsoleting and superseding stuff, and I
> checked the status on the CSS-WG's Notes.
> https://www.w3.org/TR/?tag=css&status=note
> One that I was surprised to find there is the CSS  Profile
> (https://www.w3.org/TR/css-print/). I thought we had retired it, along
> with all other profiles, which are indeed no longer showing in that
> index page.
> I have not yet been able to locate the resolution where we decided to
> do so, but the text in the 2018 CSS Snapshot ED (still pending
> publication, sorry for procrastinating) agrees with my memory:
>> 2.2. CSS Profiles
>> Not all implementations will implement all functionality defined in 
>> CSS.
>> In the past, the Working Group published a few Profiles, which were 
>> meant to define the minimal subset of CSS that various classes of User 
>> Agents were expected to support.
>> This effort has been discontinued, as the Working Group was not 
>> finding it effective or useful, and the profiles previously defined 
>> are now unmaintained.
> Did we carve out an exception that I'm failing to remember for the
> Print Profile, or did it just slip through the cracks where we retired
> the others?
> Speaking of which, I'll note that other profiles
> (https://www.w3.org/TR/css-mobile/ & https://www.w3.org/TR/css-tv/)
> while correctly missing from the TR index page, do not carry any
> indication inside the document that they are obsolete either.
> Regardless of what happened previous, I think all 3 profiles should be
> fully obsoleted.

 From the minutes[1] I guess it slipped through the cracks. All three 
specs' ED has obsoletion notes, but css-print's TR version does not have 
an obsoletion note.

Moreover, in the "current work" page[2], CSS Print Profile is listed as 
"ComĀ­pleted" rather than "Abandoned".

[1] https://logs.csswg.org/irc.w3.org/css/2017-02-08/#e771462
[2] https://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/current-work.en.html
Received on Friday, 7 September 2018 04:16:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:53:10 UTC