CSS Backgrounds and Borders Level 3 Disposition of Comments

Last call document:http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-css3-background-20100612/

Editor's draft: http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-background/

The following color coding convention is used for comments:

An issue can be closed as Accepted, OutOfScope, Invalid, Rejected, or Retracted. Verified indicates commentor's acceptance of the response.

Issue 1.
Summary:  Remove 'box-shadow' from At-Risk list
From:     Sylvain Galineau
Comment:  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Jun/0483.html
Response: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Oct/0479.html
Closed:   Accepted
Issue 2.
Summary:  box-shadow spread should specify half the blur radius
From:     Tab Atkins?
Comment:  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Jun/0513.html
Response: very long thread resulting in edits :)
Closed:   Accepted
Issue 3.
Summary:  border-radius for corner-radius confusing; make own section?
From:     CSS3.info / Jeffrey Gilbert, Krzysztof Maczyński
Comment:  http://www.css3.info/w3c-issues-last-call-for-comments-on-css3-backgrounds-and-borders/#comment-259427
Response: http://www.css3.info/w3c-issues-last-call-for-comments-on-css3-backgrounds-and-borders/#comment-259447
Closed:   Accepted
Issue 4.
Summary:  inset box-shadow should paint over content
From:     divya manian
Comment:  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Jul/0422.html
Comment:  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Jul/0474.html
Response: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Sep/0111.html
Closed:   Rejected
Issue 5.
Summary:  Initial value currentcolor not defined
From:     Christian Roth
Comment:  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Oct/0015.html
Response: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Oct/0016.html
Comment:  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Oct/0019.html
Response: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Oct/0480.html
Closed:   Accepted
Issue 6.
Summary:  Example inconsistent with prose
From:     Brian Manthos
Comment:  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Sep/0368.html
Response: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Sep/0369.html
Comment:  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Sep/0370.html
Response: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Sep/0383.html
Closed:   Invalid / OutOfScope
Issue 7.
Summary:  Not defined how border curve breaks across lines
From:     Sylvain Galineau
Comment:  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Sep/0109.html
Response: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Oct/0395.html
Closed:   Accepted
Issue 8.
Summary:  border-image width numbers should refer to *computed* border-widths
From:     Brad Kemper
Comment:  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Sep/0065.html
Response: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Sep/0066.html
Closed:   Accepted
Issue 9.
Summary:  Clarify how background shorthand sets values to layers
From:     Øyvind Stenhaug
Comment:  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Aug/0387.html
Response: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Oct/0478.html
Closed:   Accepted
Issue 10.
Summary:  Add syntax to mark foreground images used as background images
From:     Michael Cooper on behalf of PFWG
Comment:  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Oct/0821.html
Response: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Oct/0829.html
Response: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-wai-pf/2010OctDec/0142.html
Closed:   Accepted
Verified: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Dec/att-0356/css_response_from_pf.html
Issue 11.
Summary:  Reference WCAG 2.0 SC1.1.1 F3
From:     Michael Cooper on behalf of PFWG
Comment:  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Oct/0821.html
Response: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Oct/0829.html
Closed:   Accepted
Verified: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Dec/att-0356/css_response_from_pf.html
Issue 12.
Summary:  border-image shorthand inconcistent with CSS2.1 informative grammar
From:     Yves
Comment:  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Nov/0078.html
Response: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Nov/0405.html
Closed:   Rejected
Verified: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Nov/0484.html