[web-animations-2] Update to editor spec

[kevers-google]

[web-animations-2] Update to editor spec

The patch converts web-animations-2 from an unofficial draft to an editors' draft. In the process, converted from a delta spec to a full spec since web-animations-1 is sufficiently mature and few additional edits to the v1 spec are expected. All lint warnings have been resolved.

[birtles]

Thanks for doing this. I'm not entirely sure we're ready to convert from a delta spec yet. We still have a few more outstanding issues on Web Animations and it would be good to see it get to CR first?

[kevers-google]

My concern is that scroll-linked animations depend on web-animations-2 and even without the "not ready for implementation" warning the web-animations-2 spec reads as a exploration spec and not something that should be a external dependency of another spec. If the remaining edits to web-animations-1 (e.g timeline-phase) are relatively minor, they should be easy enough to keep in sync.

[flackr]

We still have a few more outstanding issues on Web Animations and it would be good to see it get to CR first?

Specifically the list of open label: web-animations-1 issues? i.e. https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Aweb-animations-1+

Skimming the list, I suspect the resolution of most of these would be relatively minor edits to apply to both web-animations-1 and web-animations-2, though I'm not too familiar with how often this is done for other specs.

[kevers-google]

I can look into putting up a fresh PR for an editor's draft that remains a delta spec. This should go quicker than the full merge. Once web-animations-2 is ready for a merge, we can look into whether it will be quicker to restart the merge process or walk through the edits and copy them over to this PR.

[kevers-google]

Uploaded a smaller PR that just cleans up all of the build warnings and references to the deprecated before and after timeline phases here:
#7487

This seems like a logical first step in migrating to an editors draft.

[birtles]

We still have a few more outstanding issues on Web Animations and it would be good to see it get to CR first?

Specifically the list of open label: web-animations-1 issues? i.e. https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Aweb-animations-1+

Yes, along with #5394 (which I've just updated the label for now).

Skimming the list, I suspect the resolution of most of these would be relatively minor edits to apply to both web-animations-1 and web-animations-2, though I'm not too familiar with how often this is done for other specs.

That's true. I've noticed that recently there have been edits to web-animations-1 too by non-editors which were just pushed without a PR so we'll need to make sure others either update both specs or, better, submit PRs so we can check.

[birtles]

@kevers-google Can we close this now? I think Web Animations 2 has already been published as a delta ED spec?