Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Final normative spec text plan #2628

Open
65 of 75 tasks
ptomato opened this issue Jul 13, 2023 · 1 comment
Open
65 of 75 tasks

Final normative spec text plan #2628

ptomato opened this issue Jul 13, 2023 · 1 comment
Labels
Milestone

Comments

@ptomato
Copy link
Collaborator

ptomato commented Jul 13, 2023

As of 2023-07-12, we have resolved all known discussions that might result in normative changes, and all of the normative changes have been presented to TC39 and received consensus. This issue is a checklist and plan for merging those normative PRs into the spec text, so that observers can see the status at a glance.

(Updated at later dates to include new normative changes to be presented to TC39 in November 2023 and February 2024)

After completing this checklist, barring fixes for bugs found during implementation, the spec should be in its final normative form, representing exactly what needs to be implemented.

The champions' plan of record after that point is to quickly address two open editorial issues that affect the ISO 8601 grammar, since V8 has let us know that the grammar changes can be disruptive even if they are only editorial ones:

Then, address the lower-priority editorial issues listed in the milestone https://github.com/tc39/proposal-temporal/milestone/11

@ptomato ptomato added this to the Stage "3.5" milestone Jul 13, 2023
@ptomato ptomato pinned this issue Jul 13, 2023
@ptomato ptomato added the meta label Jul 13, 2023
@justingrant

This comment was marked as outdated.

ptomato added a commit that referenced this issue May 26, 2024
The whole Temporal.TimeZone is going to be removed in the following
commit, but since this method is being replaced with an idiom that needs
documentation, I'm removing it in a separate commit for ease of review.

See: #2628
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants