Let's make snapshot 2020 while the year is still young

[svgeesus]

OK so what specs changed status since Snapshot 2018?

[frivoal]

• CSS-CONTAIN-1 is now a REC, and should be moved from a note to the snapshot proper
• Maybe move CSS-ALIGN-3 from the second note to the first one?
• Republish CSS-CASCADE-4, then maybe move from the second note to the first one?
• Maybe put CSS-WRITING-MODES-4 in the second note?

[frivoal]

• Also, maybe republish, then add CSS-DISPLAY-1 to the second note?

[SelenIT]

IMHO, Media Queries Level 5 should be published, since some features like prefers-color-scheme are currently widely supported and increasingly used (maybe even enough to be cleared for broad release as pre-CR Exceptions?).

[svgeesus]

Not sure if this helps, but here is the subset of CSS required by the Open IP TV profile which is then referenced by DVB DASH. Sadly these are all dated references.

Open IP TV merged into Hybrid broadcast broadband TV (HbbTV) in 2014. Their CSS profile does not seem to have been updated since.

5.1 Basic Graphic

Terminals SHALL support CSS Basic User Interface [CSS3UI-20120117] as profiled in section section B.1 CSS Basic User Interface

Terminals SHALL support CSS 2.1 [CSS21-20110607]

Terminals SHALL support CSS Color Module Level 3 [CSS3COLOR-20110607].

Terminals SHALL support CSS Image Values and Replaced Content [CSS3-IMAGES-20120417] as profiled in section section B.2 CSS Image Values and Replaced Content

Terminals SHALL support CSS Backgrounds and Borders [CSS3-BG-20120724] as profiled in section section B.3 CSS Backgrounds and Borders

5.2 Device Adaptation, Layout and Processing

Terminals SHALL support CSS Selectors Level 3 [SELECTORS-LEVEL-3-20110929].

Terminals SHALL support CSS Media Queries [CSS3-MEDIAQUERIES-20120619].

Terminals SHALL support CSS Multi-column Layout [CSS3COL-20110412].

Terminals SHALL support CSS Flexible Box Layout [FLEXBOX-20120918]

Terminals SHOULD support CSS Conditional Rules Module Level 3 [CSS3-CONDITIONAL-20121213]

5.3 Text and Fonts

Terminals SHALL support the [CSS3-FONTS-20130212] as profiled in section section B.4 CSS Fonts Module Level 3

Terminals SHALL support the Web Open Font Format [WOFF-20121213]. Applications can link to [WOFF-20121213] fonts via a @font-face rule ([CSS3-FONTS-20130212]).

Terminals SHALL support CSS Text [CSS3TEXT-20121113] as profiled in section section B.5 CSS Text Level 3

5.4 Advanced Graphic

Terminals SHALL support the CSS Transforms [CSS3-TRANSFORMS-20120911] as profiled in section section B.6 CSS Transforms

Terminals SHALL support CSS Transitions [CSS3-TRANSITIONS-20130212] as profiled in section section B.7 CSS Transitions

Terminals SHALL support CSS Animations [CSS3-ANIMATIONS-20130219]

Terminals SHALL support Canvas 2D [CANVAS-2D-20121217] as profiled in section section C.3 Canvas 2D.

[AmeliaBR]

In addition to any discussion about which specs need to be upgraded to a more stable status, is it worth having a discussion about how we can make this document more useful?

This thought inspired by two recent things…

• Bruce Lawson on Twitter asking if a single document exists with basic summary table of all CSS properties.

  It would definitely be nice if CSS published a single reference table of syntax, initial value, and so on, that could be used by people wanting to quickly scrape a machine-readable definition of CSS. Especially if it was annotated by “experimental” vs “stable”.

• Chris Coyier on CSS-Tricks talking about the marketing potential of having a single, clear name and definition (like “CSS3”) for what's new in CSS.

  The abstract of the current snapshot mentions:

  The primary audience is CSS implementers, not CSS authors, as this definition includes modules by specification stability, not Web browser adoption rate.

  But now that we have automatic widgets for summing up test results, could that be added? At least for the stable specs, where we are confident that the tests exist — it might confuse matters if we included test pass rates for specs where we know the test suites are incomplete.

[dbaron]

It may be worth reconsidering some of the items discussed in #2281.

[frivoal]

@SelenIT Yes, MQ5 should be published, but no, it's probably not ready for the snapshot, it's not that stable yet.

[SelenIT]

@AmeliaBR I wholeheartedly support the idea to make the CSS Snapshot the primary entry point of the modern CSS specs! After all, it has a section called "CSS — The Official Definition", and its short URL seems to imply that this is the main spec of the "CSS in general". Besides Chris Coyier, Peter Paul Koch recently also wrote about the marketing and educational potential of the single name for modern CSS (he suggests "CSS4" for this). I also once wrote a tweet (half-jokingly, but only half) and a short blog post (in Russian) about some benefits of having the clear umbrella terms for the distinct stages of the CSS evolution and the suitability of CSS snapshot revisions for this.

And having a first-hand reference of actual CSS properties, values, and their maturity status directly from W3C in one place would be extremely useful for everybody!

@frivoal this particular feature (prefers-color-scheme) has a surprisingly good browser support and has been actively promoted by many tech evangelists during the last half year or so. That's why I thought it would be nice to make this feature "less experimental" :)

[frivoal]

@SelenIT So far, we've let sites like caniuse or MDN worry about tracking how well implemented things are. We might change what we do with the snapshot, but for now, it is not trying to be a competitor to those, and fulfills a different role: that of tracking which specifications are REC or not-quite-REC-but-nearly-as-stable. Media queries 5 doesn't qualify, even though it does have some very nice features with good adoption.

[SelenIT]

@frivoal I'm not suggesting making the CSS Snapshot kind of duplicate for caniuse or adding the entire MQ5 spec into it. I only supposed than one particular well-adopted feature might be a good candidate for addition to this section.

And I wouldn't underestimate the importance of the ability to easily tell the "not-quite-REC-but-nearly-as-stable" features apart from the experimental ones for the web developers. The W3C statuses alone, unfortunately, are not always informative enough, e.g., the WD status can mean the early stage of the spec lifecycle as well as the former CR (or even REC) being updated after minor corrections. So being included in the snapshot (like, e.g., CSS Multicol 1) seems to be a more reliable indicator of the "readiness" of the spec.

[svgeesus]

For a list of all properties, descriptors, and values there is the CSS index but that links to the relevant spec for the actual definition (it is really an index).

[dbaron]

So four specs that I suggested for 2018 to be promoted to the lowest-status "fairly stable" list because I thought there was a bunch of implementation work happening for them, but which were not because the specs had too many open issues at the time, were:

• fonts-4
• font-loading-3
• ruby-3
• color-4

I think it's worth looking at whether these specs have fewer open issues now.