W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > August 2009

RE: Editing specifications with ReSpec.js

From: <richard.tibbett@orange-ftgroup.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 17:57:36 +0200
Message-ID: <355A518BC0575547B2A3D6773AAF8EEF2BAAD8@ftrdmel1>
To: <robin@robineko.com>
Cc: <jmcf@tid.es>, <public-device-apis@w3.org>, <marcosc@opera.com>
> On Aug 6, 2009, at 17:16 , <richard.tibbett@orange-ftgroup.com> wrote:
> > My previous email crossed with yours, Robin :(
> Such is the internet!
> > So now I understand the process I would still suggest that 
> the specs 
> > minus JS applies to all drafts too.
> You mean Editor's Drafts too? I think that would encourage 
> people to not commit as often as they should, which is IMHO a 
> bad idea. The ED drafts are mostly to help the WG work and 
> communicate with its community. Whenever there's a big 
> difference between the ED and the latest published WD a new 
> publication should be made in order to reach a wider audience 
> (you know, publish early, publish often ;).

OK. Early and often is good and I agree automated snapshots will be
difficult initially.

Perhaps then ReSpec.js could check the browser environment on
initialisation. If it fails whatever we need (e.g. it's not a
supported/tested browser or e.g., Javascript is currently disabled) then
it would leave a big red div at the top of the page stating that 'this
page is not rendering correctly...' and possibly why e.g. 'you're using
IE6 and we only support these browser + versions...' or 'you must enable

Could be useful. Obviously, any snapshots generated and this info gets
removed (assuming the snapshots are created from a suitable browser).

I'm happy to add and play about with this in the ReSpec.js if it's of
Received on Thursday, 6 August 2009 15:58:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:53:38 UTC