W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > July 2015

Please review by 29 July: DAP questionnaire response re /TR Style Sheet Update 2016

From: Frederick Hirsch <w3c@fjhirsch.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 10:13:40 -0400
Message-Id: <39A5373A-FAC2-44E5-9987-2FF45CCB41F9@fjhirsch.com>
To: W3C Device APIs WG <public-device-apis@w3.org>
All:

There is an ongoing effort in the W3C to improve the style sheets use for /TR publications on a continuous improvement basis.
See the plan [1] and note from fantasi [2]  to see the details.

As I've completed this survey for another WG [3] and can only respond once online I will be responding with a text version for DAP.

Please take a look at the draft response below - if you have any comments, suggestions or concerns please respond (to the list) by next Wednesday, 29 July.

I will then send a response to the questionnaire after next Wednesday.

regards, Frederick

Frederick Hirsch
Chair, W3C Device APIs WG (DAP)

www.fjhirsch.com
@fjhirsch

[1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/spec-prod/2015AprJun/0010.html

[2] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/spec-prod/2015AprJun/0018.html

[3] Web Annotation WG, https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/tr-design-survey-2015/results


==== Draft response ===

This is a text version of the public questionnaire:

  "TR Design Survey"

We recommend that you only use this review form if you are unable
to use the online questionnaire, which is available at:

    https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/tr-design-survey-2015/
If you choose to send in this questionnaire form instead of using the
online questionnaire, please mail the completed form to www-archive@w3.org
by 31 July 2015 at 23:59 Boston Time.

The online questionnaire helps the W3C Team reduce errors and to
compute results automatically. If you believe there is a technical
reason why you are unable to use the online questionnaire, please send
the relevant information to Dominique Hazael-Massieux (dom@w3.org),
copying w3t-sys@w3.org, but in the meantime we welcome your email 
response to this form.

Thank you.

=====================
Questionnaire starts

I, 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Group
> ----
> 
> On behalf of which W3C Working Group are you answering this survey?
> 
> 
> 
 
Device APIs (DAP), http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/

> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Sample(s)
> ----
> Paste in URLs to a representative sample (1-3 links) of your specs. If
> styling differs substantially between /TR and your editor's drafts,
> please link to both versions. 
> 
> 
 
Vibration API  http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/REC-vibration-20150210/

Battery Status http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/CR-battery-status-20141209/

Generic Sensor API http://w3c.github.io/sensors/



> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Specification Processor(s)
> ----
> What spec pre-processor(s) does your WG use?
> 
> 
 
ReSpec

> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Group style sheet(s)
> ----
> Paste in URLs to any WG-specific style sheets you use.
> 
> 
 
None

> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Like
> ----
> What do you like about your current styles?
> 
> 

highlighting of notes and example blocks within spec, clear (rely on ReSpec)

familiar with format

> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Dislike
> ----
> What do you dislike about your current styles?
> 
> 
 
Status section could be clearer for different sections

print version can cut off text that goes off page

> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Complex style
> ----
> Paste in URLs to any parts of your spec that are stylistically complex or
> tricky, and we should therefore be careful not to screw up.
> 
> 
 
WebIDL display is important

> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Table style
> ----
> The new styles will include rules for rendering data tables. These will
> be opt-in by class name, and rely heavily on good markup (use of THEAD,
> TBODY, COLGROUP, scope attributes, etc.). See Simple Example, Less Simple
> Example, and Extra-Complex Example. Paste in URLs to a sampling of any
> data tables you are using so that we can try to accommodate those in the
> styling, if practical. 
> 
> 
 
None

> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> CSS WG Style
> ----
> The CSSWG has made a number of minor improvements to the existing spec
> styles, which we might just adopt wholesale. Please comment on what you
> like/dislike about these styles, as demonstrated in the CSS3 Text
> specification.
> 
> 
 
not familiar with this

> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Anything else?
> ----
> 
>     Is there anything else we should consider?
> 
> 
> 
 
Need to make sure styles work and are incorporated with ReSpec.

Some old specs need to be maintained, easier to minimize changes if old styles are still available etc to minimize differences.
Need way to specify 'use legacy', perhaps by year. (e.g. generate diff without changes due to styling...)

> 
> These answers were last modified on 
> by 
> 

=== end ===
Received on Thursday, 23 July 2015 14:14:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:54:06 UTC