W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > April 2011

Re: publication infrastructure / respec

From: Pierre-Antoine Champin <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr>
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 14:37:49 +0100
Message-ID: <4DBABF2D.4000104@liris.cnrs.fr>
To: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
CC: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, public-rdf-wg <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
+1 for hg as well (and to the recommended read by Michael)

@danbri: for what I read, HTML5 has an XML syntax:


http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/introduction.html#html-vs-xhtml

which is basically the XMLization of the DOM tree.
I don't know if there are any good XHTML-to-HTML5 stylesheet out there,
though

  pa

On 04/29/2011 02:11 PM, Michael Hausenblas wrote:
> 
>> So the basic w3.org website remains CVS-backed, as I understand it.
>> For most group Web pages, the Wiki seems a reasonable alternative,
>> especially for freeform / rough notes work.
>>
>> For the actual specs and test case repository, I'd like to give
>> Mercurial a go. Can't claim to be an advocate but I'm quite liking
>> using Git lately, and the two systems are similar
>> (http://www.w3.org/blog/systeam/2010/06/16/why_we_chose_mercurial_as_our_dvcs/
>> ).
> 
> +1 for hg and for those who still don't believe in DVCS I'd suggest  
> reading [1] - esp. the 00 section ;)
> 
> Cheers,
> 	Michael
> 
> [1] http://hginit.com/
> 
> --
> Dr. Michael Hausenblas, Research Fellow
> LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre
> DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute
> NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway
> Ireland, Europe
> Tel. +353 91 495730
> http://linkeddata.deri.ie/
> http://sw-app.org/about.html
> 
> On 29 Apr 2011, at 14:03, Dan Brickley wrote:
> 
>> On 29 April 2011 14:51, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> wrote:
>>> Thinking about it some more, I think respec is almost entirely
>>> orthogonal to revdoc (my publication-from-the-wiki system); they  
>>> overlap
>>> in generating the boilerplate at the top of the document, but  
>>> revdoc can
>>> just overwrite respec's boilerplate if necessary, and rewrite the  
>>> links
>>> during publication as necessary as well.
>>>
>>> So, I think the real questions are:
>>>
>>> 1.  Version control: CVS, Mercurial, or Wiki?
>>
>> So the basic w3.org website remains CVS-backed, as I understand it.
>> For most group Web pages, the Wiki seems a reasonable alternative,
>> especially for freeform / rough notes work.
>>
>> For the actual specs and test case repository, I'd like to give
>> Mercurial a go. Can't claim to be an advocate but I'm quite liking
>> using Git lately, and the two systems are similar
>> (http://www.w3.org/blog/systeam/2010/06/16/why_we_chose_mercurial_as_our_dvcs/
>> ).
>>
>>> 2.  Authoring format: Mediawiki markup, or HTML5-with-<sections>.   
>>> This
>>> includes how the bibliography is done.
>>
>> Is there a reasonable stable XHTML-friendly flavour of HTML5?
>>
>> Dan
>>
>>> I have no opinion, myself, on these questions.
>>>
>>>     -- Sandro
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 29 April 2011 13:38:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:41 GMT