[mediaqueries-3] Update REC

[frivoal]

As suggested in #6900 (comment), we should republish MQ3. It used to be generated by the preprocessor we used to use before bikeshed, but that hadn't been run in years on that spec, and some of the edits has been made to the source, some to the output, so I've manually updated the .html file, and stopped using the .src.html.

I have now:

• synced up all the edits that had been done only to .src.html, and applied them to the .html
• discarded the .src.html, since nobody was generating from it and is was just a trap attracting edits into what was effectively /dev/null (and for the reason mentioned by @svgeesus in Republishing Tasks Permathread #6900 (comment))
• Applied all the editorial changes that had been stashed in the errata
  • We may want to debate whether the case insensitivity change of section 3 really is editorial, or should be turned into an candidate correction. I think it's editorial because it's merely observing that css, including mediaqueries, is ASCII case insensitive, and not prescribing it.
• Applied, as a candidate correction one of the two normative errata, but not the other, since it had been overturned by a 2015 resolution (which has already made its way into MQ4 & 5, and is consistent with implementations)
• Updated the bibliography
• Written an updated change section
• Fixed up the markup and styling

So I think we're ready.

We may also want to consider whether we want to elevate the candidate correction to a proposed correction. I think we should, it's been stable for years, and has tests that are passed by all browsers, so there's no reason to hold back.

Either way, we should republish, and a WG resolution is enough for that. This issue is to ask for it.

[svgeesus]

I think it's editorial because it's merely observing that css, including mediaqueries, is ASCII case insensitive, and not prescribing it.

I agree and also, so does CSSWG when the exact same issue was considered editorial for republishing CSS Color 3, which was published today.

[css-meeting-bot]

The CSS Working Group just discussed MQ3 Rec update, and agreed to the following:

• RESOLVED: Publish a Proposed Correction for MQ3, along with any necessary antecedents as determined by florian/chris/fantasai

The full IRC log of that discussion

<TabAtkins> Topic: MQ3 Rec update
<TabAtkins> github: https://github.com//issues/6962
<TabAtkins> florian: Elika suggests we might want an update since it's been a while
<TabAtkins> florian: We haven't touched it since 2012
<TabAtkins> florian: Presumably we thought 4 and 5 would be done
<TabAtkins> florian: Also haven't rebuilt it since then, since it's on the old preprocessor
<TabAtkins> florian: Some edits went into source, some went into output
<TabAtkins> florian: I synced them, and deleted the source since nobody uses it anymore
<TabAtkins> florian: And made a few markup fixes
<TabAtkins> florian: Also errata. Most are editorial
<TabAtkins> florian: One was later overturned, but we didn't remove it from errata
<TabAtkins> florian: One was normative, so I've included it as a candidate correction
<TabAtkins> florian: I think we're ready to publish.
<TabAtkins> florian: But if the group agrees I'd rather have it as a proposed correction rather than candidate correction
<TabAtkins> chris: don't think you can do that
<TabAtkins> chris: a proposed correction must have the same text as a candidate correction
<TabAtkins> florian: hm, you might be right, but i think we could do two pubs in a five minute span
<TabAtkins> chris: true there's no minimum review period
<TabAtkins> chris: Think it's an abuse of process, but it's not disallowed
<TabAtkins> astearns: So we could od candidate corr, let the AC know...
<TabAtkins> florian: Letting the AC know is the *proposed* correction thing
<TabAtkins> astearns: So you're suggesting do a candidate correction now, and do a proposed correction sometime later?
<TabAtkins> florian: I propose doing it immediately after since we gain nothing from a delay, but we can wait a bit if necessary
<TabAtkins> chris: you can do a proposed correction and ask the director and see what happens, but it might take more time
<TabAtkins> florian: We don't need toa sk the director, these are nonnormative until they're folded in
<TabAtkins> [missing some process discussion]
<TabAtkins> TabAtkins: Propose we resolve to publish a Proposed Correction, along with any necessary antecedents?
<TabAtkins> RESOLVED: Publish a Proposed Correction for MQ3, along with any necessary antecedents as determined by florian/chris/fantasai
<chris> https://www.w3.org/Guide/transitions?profile=REC&rec=substantive
<TabAtkins> florian: Maybe a followup, maybe implied
<TabAtkins> florian: Once this is done we should clear the errata
<TabAtkins> chris: You automatically start with a new blank errata when3eve ryou publish a doc

[svgeesus]

Guide has now been updated on how to do this.

[svgeesus]

Although publication and checker services are having issues today

[svgeesus]

Taking a bit longer to squeeze this one through pubrules than usual, so missed the deadline for Tues 08 Mar publication. Now aiming for Thu 10th.

@frivoal Should this spec continue to use the old-style shortname css3-mediaqueries or should it be updated to mediaqueries-3 for consistency with mediaqueries-4 and mediaqueries-5?

[svgeesus]

@frivoal ?

[tabatkins]

Ah, please match up with mediaqueries-3

[svgeesus]

That was what I thought, but the current ED does not so I wanted to check first.