tech support 8

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Tuesday, 7 June 2011

CSS 2.1 is Finally Final

Posted on 09:30 by Unknown



W3C
It's only been 13 years, but CSS version 2.1 is now officially a W3C Recommendation — essentially meaning the specification is final. Which of course means you are now all free to use it in your web pages.




CSS2 became a W3C Recommendation on May 12, 1998, over 13 years ago. Since then the CSS Working Group has been developing CSS Level 2 Revision 1 (CSS 2.1) to correct errors and omissions from the original CSS2 specification. For context, the HTML 4 specification was approved on April 24, 1998. The HTML 4.01 specification was approved on December 24, 1999. Between those two versions, little more than a year and a half passed.



The W3C has a slightly confusing progression of a specification before it is considered a "standard." There are essentially four steps:




  1. Working Draft (WD): This is the first time a proposed specification is shown to the public and open for comment.

  2. Candidate Recommendation (CR): Significant features are mostly locked and feedback is requested in how to implement the standard.

  3. Proposed Recommendation (PR): The specification has been submitted to the W3C Advisory Council for approval. Changes at this point are rare.

  4. W3C Recommendation (REC): The specification is final and endorsed by the W3C. This is what the general public considers a final standard.





In July of last year I wrote up a post about the CSS 2.1 specification status (
CSS 2.1 Still Not Final
). Bruce Lawson picked up on the irony in my post (or at least my bewildered expression) and used humor to convey just how this hasn't stopped anyone from implementing it for the last decade-plus (CSS 2.1 “not ready for use” says journalist).




The key reason that this is newsworthy is because CSS level 3 (CSS3) is relying on CSS 2.1 to be wrapped up before it can move forward to the final steps. The CSS Working Group acknowledges that future CSS specifications rely on this final step (read the original release from June 30, 2010: An Update on CSS 2.1):



[CSS] 2.1 must be released as a Web Standard because that's one of the current cornerstones of the architecture of the World Wide Web. We cannot make the next steps, CSS 3 even module by module, happen without 2.1 before.



In case you want to replace the last version of the CSS 2.1 specification that you have hanging on your refrigerator, you can grab the latest (today's) version at the W3C site:




  • Cascading Style Sheets Level 2 Revision 1 (CSS 2.1) Specification: W3C Recommendation 07 June 2011




Just to make sure CSS3 isn't lost in the certain global buzz over CSS 2.1, the W3C pushed two more CSS specifications to W3C Recommendation status today:




  • CSS Color Module Level 3: W3C Recommendation 07 June 2011

  • A MathML for CSS Profile: W3C Recommendation 07 June 2011




For further reading, visit the press at the W3C site:




  • Cascading Style Sheets Standard Boasts Unprecedented Interoperability (full release)

  • Cascading Style Sheets Standard Boasts Unprecedented Interoperability (mini release)



Update: June 10, 2011




Net Magazine has a brief piece on the wrap-up of CSS 2.1 by interviewing some known standardistas and getting their thoughts on the milestone approach versus the constant iteration approach: It's official: W3C finalises CSS 2.1

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Posted in css, html, standards, W3C, whatwg | No comments
Newer Post Older Post Home

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • Browser Performance Chart
    Jacob Gube has posted a handy chart over at Six Revisions titled " Performance Comparison of Major Web Browsers ." He tests the c...
  • Google Dashboard: What Google Knows about You
    Google announced a new service/feature today, Google Dashboard . Given all the services Google offers and all the ways you can interact with...
  • Facebook, HTML5, and Mis-Reporting
    My Twitter stream and the headlines of sites across the web yesterday lit up with Facebook's CEO blaming its stock price (failure to mee...
  • App Store Meta Tags
    Why yes, Dominos, I'd love to tap again to get your real home page to order a pizza when I could have done it right here, below your ove...
  • Speaking at Mom 2.0 in Houston, TX
    I will be in Houston this week to speak at the Mom 2.0 Summit (Feb. 18-20, 2010, Houston, TX). To make it a little easier to describe, here...
  • Codepen Has Handy Sharing Tools for Devs
    There are plenty of online resources for playing around with code right in the browser, no server of your own needed, that you can then shar...
  • History of Eye-Tracking as Research Tool
    If you've ever wondered what eye-tracking is and where it came from, there is a historical breakdown in the article A Brief History of E...
  • Opera: Presto! It's now WebKit
    Opera is replacing its Presto rendering engine with WebKit (Chromium, really, when you factor in the V8 JavaScript rendering engine). Big n...
  • The Science of Trust in Social Media
    I am one of those people who always needs to see proof of some assertion, evidence to back up a claim. While I can accept anecdotal evidence...
  • Developer Discusses Dyslexia and Dyscalculia
    Sabrina Dent , a web designer hailing from Ireland, has blogged about her struggle with dyslexia and dyscalculia and web applications today...

Categories

  • accessibility
  • Adobe
  • analytics
  • Apple
  • apps
  • ARIA
  • Bing
  • Blink
  • Brightkite
  • browser
  • Buzz
  • Chrome
  • clients
  • css
  • design
  • Facebook
  • Firefox
  • Flash
  • fonts
  • food
  • Foursquare
  • g11n
  • geolocation
  • globalization
  • Google
  • Gowalla
  • html
  • i18n
  • ICANN
  • infographic
  • Instagram
  • internationalization
  • internet
  • Internet Explorer
  • JavaScript
  • JAWS
  • Klout
  • L10n
  • law
  • localization
  • Lynx
  • Mapquest
  • Microsoft
  • mobile
  • Netscape
  • ning
  • Opera
  • patents
  • picplz
  • Plus
  • print
  • privacy
  • project management
  • QR
  • rant
  • RSS
  • Safari
  • SCVNGR
  • search
  • SEM
  • SEO
  • social media
  • Sony
  • speaking
  • standards
  • SVG
  • touch
  • translation
  • Twitter
  • typefaces
  • usability
  • UX
  • Verizon
  • video
  • W3C
  • WAI
  • WCAG
  • WebKit
  • whatwg
  • Wired
  • WOFF
  • xhtml
  • Yahoo
  • YouTube

Blog Archive

  • ►  2013 (39)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  November (7)
    • ►  September (4)
    • ►  July (3)
    • ►  June (2)
    • ►  May (5)
    • ►  April (3)
    • ►  March (6)
    • ►  February (2)
    • ►  January (6)
  • ►  2012 (63)
    • ►  December (2)
    • ►  November (4)
    • ►  October (5)
    • ►  September (5)
    • ►  August (4)
    • ►  July (6)
    • ►  June (7)
    • ►  May (7)
    • ►  April (8)
    • ►  March (5)
    • ►  February (3)
    • ►  January (7)
  • ▼  2011 (67)
    • ►  December (5)
    • ►  November (7)
    • ►  October (5)
    • ►  September (4)
    • ►  August (8)
    • ►  July (3)
    • ▼  June (8)
      • Find QR Code Mistakes Before Making Your Own
      • A Little More on Klout and My Magical Gift
      • Social Scoring As the New SEO
      • The evolt.org Logo Using Only CSS
      • Does Your Klout Score Mean Anything?
      • Make Your Own TLD? (I want .bacon)
      • CSS 2.1 is Finally Final
      • Testing IE Versions via IE Compatibility Modes
    • ►  May (3)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (6)
    • ►  February (6)
    • ►  January (11)
  • ►  2010 (100)
    • ►  December (8)
    • ►  November (7)
    • ►  October (5)
    • ►  September (10)
    • ►  August (7)
    • ►  July (11)
    • ►  June (12)
    • ►  May (6)
    • ►  April (8)
    • ►  March (10)
    • ►  February (5)
    • ►  January (11)
  • ►  2009 (51)
    • ►  December (9)
    • ►  November (6)
    • ►  October (21)
    • ►  September (13)
    • ►  August (2)
  • ►  2003 (3)
    • ►  October (1)
    • ►  January (2)
  • ►  2002 (9)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  June (3)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (3)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2001 (1)
    • ►  February (1)
  • ►  2000 (4)
    • ►  October (1)
    • ►  July (1)
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  1999 (7)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  September (2)
    • ►  August (2)
    • ►  July (1)
    • ►  June (1)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

Unknown
View my complete profile