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

Re: publication infrastructure / respec

From: Guus Schreiber <guus.schreiber@vu.nl>
Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 23:25:37 +0200
Message-ID: <4DD044D1.2000603@vu.nl>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
CC: Gavin Carothers <gavin@topquadrant.com>, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, public-rdf-wg <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
ACTION-46 (Guus): Look at spec authoring tool

I also read the Respec documentation. I prefer editing HTML instead of wiki text 
(which is fine for short texts, but not for long docs). However, given my 
eyesight my prefs are sometimes a bit different.

The references seem to be handled in an acceptable way in Respec, which is 
important.

Guus

On 13/05/2011 06:50, Ivan Herman wrote:
> On the bibliography issue:
>
> - we all can add any stable document to the 'central' biblio file used by recspec
> - it is easy, though a small javascript snippet added to the file itself, to add one's own bibliography. That can either be local to the file itself or we could set up an RDF WG bibliography file that we would all share. The latter is better because we can ensure consistency on, say, the cross references among our own documents.
>
> Ivan
>
> On May 13, 2011, at 02:49 , Gavin Carothers wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 5:51 AM, Sandro Hawke<sandro@w3.org>  wrote:
>>> So, I think the real questions are:
>>>
>>> 1.  Version control: CVS, Mercurial, or Wiki?
>>
>> +1 Mercurial
>>
>> Offline DCVS far preferred to just about anything else.
>>
>> -1 CVS
>>
>> Deep painful memories involving tags and branches, the scars haven't
>> really healed.
>>
>> -0.5 Mediawiki
>>
>> Conflicting edits are really annoying to resolve, and tend to mean
>> just dropping the edit completely and starting the changes over. The
>> lack of any offline capability is also frustrating at times.
>>
>>>
>>> 2.  Authoring format: Mediawiki markup, or HTML5-with-<sections>.  This
>>> includes how the bibliography is done.
>>
>> Attached is a 20 minute job of turning Turtle into Respec HTML5 while
>> learning how Respec works, just did the introduction and first
>> section. It's reasonably easy to edit, and produces good output
>> without any real tooling work at all. From the attachement it's clear
>> that someone editing or reading doesn't need anything other then a
>> text editor and the document being edited.
>>
>> The issue for Turtle with both Mediawiki and Respec will the EBNF
>> sections. I hope there exists some tool for producing HTML from
>> something simpler. Perhaps Eric knows and can mention whatever tool is
>> currently used for that or if it's done by hand? (shudder) If there is
>> a tool then the respec import method would work to include the output
>> of the tool and leave the rest of the editing in the HTML.
>>
>> Having played with both for an hour or two the process of directly
>> editing the HTML seems far simpler and less suprising then trying to
>> make Mediawiki do what I mean. On other issue from the error messages
>> in the Respec output there are going to be somethings to add to it's
>> bibliography library as well.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Gavin
>> <TurtleRespec.html>
>
>
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> mobile: +31-641044153
> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
>
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
Prof. Guus Schreiber
Web & Media, Computer Science
VU University Amsterdam
http://www.cs.vu.nl/~guus
Received on Sunday, 15 May 2011 21:26:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:42 GMT