- From: Mark Foltz via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 00:58:34 +0000
- To: public-secondscreen@w3.org
I took a look at these two alternatives. The main differences that I can see: - ReSpec works directly in the browser (update cycle is edit-reload). Bikeshed requires a local processing tool and makefile (update cycle is edit-make-reload). - Publication with ReSpec requires a manual step - saving the generated HTML in a file. I think this is reasonable. - ReSpec expects well formed HTML. - Bikeshed uses a simplified syntax including some support for Markdown. - Both support cross references within the spec and references outside the spec using SpecRef [1] Overall I am leaning towards the tool that makes it easiest for new contributors to get up to speed, and makes the editor's job easier. Being able to iterate on the spec without a separate processing step seems like a clear win, so I propose we adopt ReSpec. [1] https://github.com/tobie/specref -- GitHub Notif of comment by mfoltzgoogle See https://github.com/w3c/presentation-api/issues/116#issuecomment-121793060
Received on Thursday, 16 July 2015 00:58:36 UTC