[css3-exclusions] re-word issue 1
authorAlan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>
Thu, 13 Sep 2012 13:30:16 -0700
changeset 6708d238b1e9c4ac
parent 6707 e92b5e2ae5ad
child 6709 5f46be322578
[css3-exclusions] re-word issue 1
css3-exclusions/Exclusions.src.html
css3-exclusions/Overview.html
     1.1 --- a/css3-exclusions/Exclusions.src.html	Thu Sep 13 13:22:46 2012 -0700
     1.2 +++ b/css3-exclusions/Exclusions.src.html	Thu Sep 13 13:30:16 2012 -0700
     1.3 @@ -709,8 +709,31 @@
     1.4          <div class="issue-details">
     1.5              <p class="short-desc">Is the CSS exclusions processing model incorrect?</p>
     1.6          </div>
     1.7 -     </div>
     1.8 +    </div>
     1.9 +    </div>
    1.10  
    1.11 +    <div class="issue">
    1.12 +
    1.13 +        <p>The current draft provides a model for exclusions
    1.14 +        without a collision-avoidance model. 
    1.15 +        The existing exclusion model in CSS uses floats, 
    1.16 +        which have both exclusion and collision-avoidance behavior. 
    1.17 +        Concerns have been raised that allowing exclusions 
    1.18 +        without collision avoidance could be harmful, 
    1.19 +        particularly with absolutely-positioned elements. 
    1.20 +        Three options should be considered:<p>
    1.21 +        <ol>
    1.22 +            <li>Allow exclusions in positioning schemes 
    1.23 +                with no collision avoidance.</li>
    1.24 +            <li>Disallow exclusions in positioning schemes 
    1.25 +                with no collision avoidance.</li>
    1.26 +            <li>Define collision-avoidance behavior 
    1.27 +                for positioning schemes without it, 
    1.28 +                and use this behavior by default with exclusions.</li>
    1.29 +        <ol>
    1.30 +    </div>
    1.31 +
    1.32 +    <div class="issue-marker wrapper">
    1.33      <div class="issue-marker" data-bug_id="15083" data-bug_status="NEW">
    1.34          <a href="https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15083">Issue-15083</a>
    1.35          <div class="issue-details">
    1.36 @@ -718,20 +741,6 @@
    1.37          </div>
    1.38      </div>
    1.39      </div>
    1.40 -
    1.41 -    <p class="issue">
    1.42 -        The rules for exclusions order and exclusions on absolutely positioned elements
    1.43 -        (particularly those with static position) build this exclusions model on top of
    1.44 -        the absolute positioning model in CSS Level 2, rather than on top of floats, the
    1.45 -        existing exclusion model in CSS Level 1 and 2. The CSS Working Group has not reached
    1.46 -        consensus on whether it intends to base the new exclusions features in this specification
    1.47 -        on top of absolute positioning (as these sections of this specification do) or on
    1.48 -        top of floats.
    1.49 -    </p>
    1.50 -
    1.51 -    <p class="note">
    1.52 -        This module does not depend on any particular positioning scheme.
    1.53 -    </p>
    1.54      
    1.55          <h3 id="exclusions-processing-model">Processing model</h3>
    1.56          
     2.1 --- a/css3-exclusions/Overview.html	Thu Sep 13 13:22:46 2012 -0700
     2.2 +++ b/css3-exclusions/Overview.html	Thu Sep 13 13:30:16 2012 -0700
     2.3 @@ -10,10 +10,10 @@
     2.4    <link href="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" rel=schema.DC>
     2.5    <meta content="CSS Exclusions and Shapes Module Level 3" name=DC.title>
     2.6    <meta content=text name=DC.type>
     2.7 -  <meta content=2012-09-05 name=DC.issued>
     2.8 +  <meta content=2012-09-13 name=DC.issued>
     2.9    <meta content="http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-exclusions/" name=DC.creator>
    2.10    <meta content=W3C name=DC.publisher>
    2.11 -  <meta content="http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/ED-css3-exclusions-20120905/"
    2.12 +  <meta content="http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/ED-css3-exclusions-20120913/"
    2.13     name=DC.identifier>
    2.14    <link href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/ipr-notice#Copyright"
    2.15     rel=DC.rights>
    2.16 @@ -50,7 +50,7 @@
    2.17  
    2.18     <h1 id=css-exclusions-module>CSS Exclusions and Shapes Module Level 3</h1>
    2.19  
    2.20 -   <h2 class="no-num no-toc" id=longstatus-date>Editor's Draft 5 September
    2.21 +   <h2 class="no-num no-toc" id=longstatus-date>Editor's Draft 13 September
    2.22      2012</h2>
    2.23  
    2.24     <dl>
    2.25 @@ -58,7 +58,7 @@
    2.26  
    2.27      <dd><a
    2.28       href="http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-exclusions/">http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-exclusions/</a></dd>
    2.29 -    <!--<dd><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/ED-css3-exclusions-20120905/">http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-css3-exclusions-20120905/</a></dd>-->
    2.30 +    <!--<dd><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/ED-css3-exclusions-20120913/">http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-css3-exclusions-20120913/</a></dd>-->
    2.31  
    2.32      <dt>Latest version:
    2.33  
    2.34 @@ -1059,7 +1059,32 @@
    2.35       <p class=short-desc>Is the CSS exclusions processing model incorrect?
    2.36      </div>
    2.37     </div>
    2.38 -
    2.39 +  </div>
    2.40 +
    2.41 +  <div class=issue>
    2.42 +   <p>The current draft provides a model for exclusions without a
    2.43 +    collision-avoidance model. The existing exclusion model in CSS uses
    2.44 +    floats, which have both exclusion and collision-avoidance behavior.
    2.45 +    Concerns have been raised that allowing exclusions without collision
    2.46 +    avoidance could be harmful, particularly with absolutely-positioned
    2.47 +    elements. Three options should be considered:
    2.48 +
    2.49 +   <p>
    2.50 +
    2.51 +   <ol>
    2.52 +    <li>Allow exclusions in positioning schemes with no collision avoidance.
    2.53 +
    2.54 +    <li>Disallow exclusions in positioning schemes with no collision
    2.55 +     avoidance.
    2.56 +
    2.57 +    <li>Define collision-avoidance behavior for positioning schemes without
    2.58 +     it, and use this behavior by default with exclusions.
    2.59 +   </ol>
    2.60 +
    2.61 +   <ol></ol>
    2.62 +  </div>
    2.63 +
    2.64 +  <div class="issue-marker wrapper">
    2.65     <div class=issue-marker data-bug_id=15083 data-bug_status=NEW> <a
    2.66      href="https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15083">Issue-15083</a>
    2.67  
    2.68 @@ -1069,18 +1094,6 @@
    2.69     </div>
    2.70    </div>
    2.71  
    2.72 -  <p class=issue> The rules for exclusions order and exclusions on absolutely
    2.73 -   positioned elements (particularly those with static position) build this
    2.74 -   exclusions model on top of the absolute positioning model in CSS Level 2,
    2.75 -   rather than on top of floats, the existing exclusion model in CSS Level 1
    2.76 -   and 2. The CSS Working Group has not reached consensus on whether it
    2.77 -   intends to base the new exclusions features in this specification on top
    2.78 -   of absolute positioning (as these sections of this specification do) or on
    2.79 -   top of floats.
    2.80 -
    2.81 -  <p class=note> This module does not depend on any particular positioning
    2.82 -   scheme.
    2.83 -
    2.84    <h3 id=exclusions-processing-model><span class=secno>3.5. </span>Processing
    2.85     model</h3>
    2.86  
    2.87 @@ -2482,10 +2495,10 @@
    2.88     <dt id=CSS3VAL>[CSS3VAL]
    2.89  
    2.90     <dd>HÃ¥kon Wium Lie; Tab Atkins; Elika J. Etemad. <a
    2.91 -    href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-css3-values-20120308/"><cite>CSS
    2.92 -    Values and Units Module Level 3.</cite></a> 8 March 2012. W3C Working
    2.93 -    Draft. (Work in progress.) URL: <a
    2.94 -    href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-css3-values-20120308/">http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-css3-values-20120308/</a>
    2.95 +    href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/CR-css3-values-20120828/"><cite>CSS
    2.96 +    Values and Units Module Level 3.</cite></a> 28 August 2012. W3C Candidate
    2.97 +    Recommendation. (Work in progress.) URL: <a
    2.98 +    href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/CR-css3-values-20120828/">http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/CR-css3-values-20120828/</a>
    2.99     </dd>
   2.100     <!---->
   2.101