search

w3c / csswg-drafts

CSS Working Group Editor Drafts
https://drafts.csswg.org/
Other
4.46k stars 657 forks source link

Retire "Introduction to CSS3" #6441

Open svgeesus opened 3 years ago

svgeesus commented 3 years ago

From the Introduction to CSS3 (2001)

The members of the CSS&FP Working Group have decided to modularize the CSS specification. This modularization will help to clarify the relationships between the different parts of the specification, and reduce the size of the complete document. It will also allow us to build specific tests on a per module basis and will help implementors in deciding which portions of CSS to support. Furthermore, the modular nature of the specification will make it possible for individual modules to be updated as needed, thus allowing for a more flexible and timely evolution of the specification as a whole. This document lists all the modules to be contained in the future CSS3 specification.

Is any of the introductory text useful (perhaps to add to the next snapshot)?

This document should be retired

frivoal commented 3 years ago

Turn it into a note, and state in its introduction that this is no longer maintained and left for historical interest. Then it can be marked as retired.

tabatkins commented 3 years ago

Yes to all that.

(Also, wtf, who thought it was a good idea to put bullets before every link on the page?)

svgeesus commented 3 years ago

@atanassov @astearns can we get an async resolution to publish?

astearns commented 3 years ago

Sounds good to me. Unless someone registers an objection here by Aug 6, 2021, we are RESOLVED to publish “Introduction to CSS3” as a note with some text explaining its historical interest.

fantasai commented 3 years ago

We already had a resolution to redirect /TR/css-roadmap to /TR/CSS, see https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-css-wg/2011AprJun/0275.html

It appears this was not done?

svgeesus commented 3 years ago

Wow and even that was "Per previous WG resolutions". Yes, seems it was not done.

If it is done, then no-one reads it (good) but also no-one reads the historic interest part. So, which should we do now? I think the proposed resolution by @astearns is better. The explanatory text can have a pointer to http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS/

svgeesus commented 2 years ago

There is now (from 2 Nov) the status of Discontinued Draft which seems like the appropriate end-point here.

frivoal commented 2 years ago

Agenda+ to resolve to republish as a Discontinued Draft

astearns commented 2 years ago

I think we can resolve this async again. Unless someone registers an objection here by Jan 17, 2022, we are RESOLVED to publish “Introduction to CSS3” as a Discontinued Draft with some text explaining its historical interest.

tabatkins commented 2 years ago

It appears we are resolved, @frivoal ^_^

frivoal commented 2 years ago

I'm happy that this happened, but I don't think I'm supposed to do anything about it. This is probably for @svgeesus. Or possibly also for @meyerweb, since he's still listed as being the editor :)