[css-scoping] Publish updated css-scoping-1 draft?

[LeaVerou]

Current published WD dates back to 2014! https://www.w3.org/TR/css-scoping/
There are several changes since then.

[svgeesus]

Looks like the changes section needs a minor update, it does not mention:

• Define that tree-scoped names inherit into descendant shadow trees

but the previous few changes are all listed.

[svgeesus]

Looks like the changes section needs a minor update

Done.

[css-meeting-bot]

The CSS Working Group just discussed [css-scoping] Publish updated css-scoping-1 draft?, and agreed to the following:

• RESOLVED: Republish when ready

The full IRC log of that discussion

<emilio> topic: [css-scoping] Publish updated css-scoping-1 draft?
<emilio> github: https://github.com//issues/7494
<emilio> lea_: I recently pulled up the spec and since drafts.csswg.org was down I used the last published draft
<emilio> ... last published version is from 2014, which is too long ago
<miriam> q+
<chris> +1
<emilio> chris: I just updated the draft changes so I think it should be good to publish
<miriam> https://github.com//issues/5809#issuecomment-910896765
<Rossen_> ack miriam
<emilio> Rossen_: given fantasai_ and TabAtkins are out happy to resolve and let them bring it back next week if needed
<emilio> miriam: we resolved a while ago to reorganize some of the scoping features
<emilio> [see comment above]
<emilio> chris: I don't recall everything but some of those changes have been made
<emilio> miriam: only concern is to keep clear what belongs where, but not opposed to republish
<emilio> jensimmons: I think the scoping spec is not about scoping because those bits are from the cascade spec
<emilio> ... there's confusion because there's a whole bunch of scoping ideas
<chris> q+
<emilio> ... so if you search for css scoping you end up in the wrong place
<emilio> ... so it'd be clearer if the spec was called shadow
<emilio> ack chris
<Rossen_> ack chris
<emilio> chris: I'm in favor of pushing specs forward, but if we're going to cause confusion I'd rather wait a week or two
<lea_> not sure anyone is actively following when a new draft is published…
<chris> not opposed to a resolution
<emilio> Rossen_: feedback is great to draw attention on some of the historical context. doubt tab / fantasai would press the button just because they see a resolution
<emilio> ... we should capture everything needed to republish
<chris> also good if the introduction had, well, text
<chris> 1. Introduction ...
<emilio> ... objections to republish when tab / fantasai are ready?
<Rossen_> q?
<emilio> RESOLVED: Republish when ready
<jensimmons> And thanks lea_ for pointing out this needed to be republished!

[svgeesus]

Maybe rename to CSS Shadow?