{"action":"opened","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/csstools/cssdb/issues/31","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/csstools/cssdb","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/csstools/cssdb/issues/31/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/csstools/cssdb/issues/31/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/csstools/cssdb/issues/31/events","html_url":"https://github.com/csstools/cssdb/issues/31","id":326136564,"number":31,"title":"Update stage definitions","user":{"login":"jonathantneal","id":188426,"avatar_url":"https://avatars0.githubusercontent.com/u/188426?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/jonathantneal","html_url":"https://github.com/jonathantneal","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jonathantneal/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jonathantneal/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jonathantneal/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jonathantneal/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jonathantneal/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jonathantneal/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jonathantneal/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jonathantneal/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jonathantneal/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":0,"created_at":"2018-05-24T14:02:06Z","updated_at":"2018-05-24T14:02:06Z","closed_at":null,"author_association":"COLLABORATOR","body":"The goal of this project is to reflect the real-life stability of new CSS features. This is intended to be helpful to developers who seek to accomplish real things with modern and emerging technologies. This simplified overview should improve communication between developers, authors, and implementors, thus improving the creation of standards, testing, feedback, and new use cases.\r\n\r\nHowever, grouping CSS features into simple, digestible stages is actually very hard. _One_ reason for this is because the maturity of a specification does not necessarily align with either its draft label or the maturity of its implementations. Here are the [current staging criteria and definitions](https://github.com/csstools/cssdb/blob/5ff1c9b6d2454bbcff28b0ac07c84e2c592a1464/STAGES.md).\r\n\r\nTo better address this particular issue, I would like to revise the criteria and description of all stages. With criteria revisions suggested by @fantasai, and assistance understanding the TC39 process from @hzoo, I would like to revise the criteria and definitions for each stage to be as follows:\r\n\r\n**Stage 0**: _Aspirational_\r\n> An **Unofficial Draft** or **Editor’s Draft** championed by a **W3C Member**. It is highly unstable and subject to change. Stage 0 features are open to ideas and discussion, but may not be considered serious.\r\n\r\n**Stage 1**: _Experimental_\r\n> An **Editor’s Draft** or early **Working Draft** championed by a **W3C Working Group**. It is highly unstable and subject to change. Stage 1 features are recognized as a real problem, but they may not be tied to any particular solution.\r\n\r\n**Stage 2**: _Allowable_\r\n> A **Working Draft** championed by a **W3C Working Group**. It should be considered incomplete, unstable, and subject to change. Stage 2 features are tied to a particular way of solving a problem.\r\n\r\n**Stage 3**: _Embraced_\r\n> A **Candidate Recommendation** championed by a **W3C Working Group** with implementations by at least 2 recognized browser vendors, possibly behind a flag. It should be considered stable and subject to minor change. Stage 3 features will likely become a standard.\r\n\r\n**Stage 4**: _Standardized_\r\n> A **Candidate Recommendation** or **Recommendation** championed by a **W3C Working Group** and implemented by all recognized browser vendors. Stage 4 features are considered a standard.\r\n\r\n@fantasai, do you feel this would _better_ reflect the stability of CSS features? @hzoo, do you feel this still captures the spirit of TC39 stages? If not, how would you recommend I improve them?\r\n\r\nBy refining these definitions, I do hope this staging process could be formally adopted by the CSSWG."}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"jonathantneal"}}