W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webplatform@w3.org > December 2012

Re: Deprecated/Non Standard Indications Within Listings

From: Alex Komoroske <komoroske@google.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 11:17:44 +1100
Message-ID: <CAPwaZpUBoBsSP+ZJ0y+5xX4sJm8xZ=YmFVU32iD8epjkLkhnZg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Michael Champion (MS OPEN TECH)" <Michael.Champion@microsoft.com>
Cc: PhistucK <phistuck@gmail.com>, frozenice <frozenice@frozenice.de>, "public-webplatform@w3.org" <public-webplatform@w3.org>
I'm all for clearly calling out this information on listing pages and on
the page itself. Before the public announcement we had plans to style the
standardization status flag appropriately on the page itself, but never got
around to it. Ideally some of our design-inclined participants will chime
in on this specific styling.

Michael, the question of what the different standardization statuses are is
a difficult issue and deserves its own thread (or topic at a content
meeting). The current list of statuses is at
http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/Property:Standardization_Status .

On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Michael Champion (MS OPEN TECH) <
Michael.Champion@microsoft.com> wrote:

>  The appearance looks fine, but there’s a continuum from “non-standard”
> to “standard” that might need some discussion.  Off the top of my head,
> there’s:****
>
> - Totally proprietary,  never offered for standardization and without any
> sort of IPR commitment****
>
> - Not offered for standardization but for which there are some
> royalty-free patent commitments (VP8 might be an example)****
>
> - Offered for standardization but ended up as W3C Notes rather than
> standards (Web SQL API comes to mind)****
>
> - On a standards track but not stable yet****
>
> - Stable spec that is (or is likely to be) standardized in more or less
> its current form (e.g HTML5, 2D Canvas, etc.)****
>
> ** **
>
> That’s probably to fine-grained for WPD’s purposes, but I’d think that at
> least 3 categories are needed, something like:****
>
> - Proprietary****
>
> - Draft Standard****
>
> - Stable Standard****
>
> ** **
>
> Thoughts?****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* PhistucK [mailto:phistuck@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 5, 2012 1:08 PM
> *To:* frozenice
> *Cc:* public-webplatform@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: Deprecated/Non Standard Indications Within Listings****
>
> ** **
>
> Done.****
>
> ** **
>
> I will be committing this change to the actual production templates this
> weekend, barring any new objection/suggestion.
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> ☆*PhistucK*****
>
>
>
> ****
>
> On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 8:31 PM, frozenice <frozenice@frozenice.de> wrote:*
> ***
>
> I like it better without the "font-weight: bold". Colors are ok.****
>
>
>
> On 05.12.2012 10:43, PhistucK wrote:****
>
>  Can someone take a look at the indications and let me know whether the
> color/box/design is fine?
> http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/Template:API_Listing_New
>
> You can see it next to "MSStream".****
>
> ☆*PhistucK*****
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: *Alex Komoroske* <komoroske@google.com <mailto:komoroske@google.com
> >>
> Date: Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 4:45 AM
> Subject: Re: Missing Essentials****
>
> To: PhistucK <phistuck@gmail.com <mailto:phistuck@gmail.com>>
> Cc: public-webplatform@w3.org <mailto:public-webplatform@w3.org>
>
>
>             13. Indicate a method/property is non standard, deprecated and
> so on.
>             Add a few check boxes to the API method/property/object (and
> more...) templates to indicate that it is non standard, deprecated,
> proprietary or obsolete (supported only
>             in Netscape 2, for example, or only on HTML 3) - each of them
> should get a check box.
>             This information should show up on the property/method tables
> of the "Applies to..." object. Ideally, anything marked as such would
> reside in a separate section below
>             everything that is standard/current, so users would not be
> encouraged to use it.
>
>
>         There's an ability to mark any reference article (including
> Methods/Properties) as being standard/obsolete/non-standard, etc.  Making
> it so that those would be pulled out
>         in the summary tables on API Objects should be relatively easy.
> Another good thing t o
>
>
>     I gave it a shot. I created two test bed templates for this purpose -
>     http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/Template:API_Listing_New
>     http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/Template:Summary_Table_Body_New
>
>
> These look good!
>
>
>     A few questions -
>     1. How do you test template changes? I created new templates just for
> the sake of experimentation, because I would not want to break all of the
> template users while
>     experimenting/making changes. Is there another way?
>
>
> I'm embarrassed to admit that what I've done up until now is just made the
> changes on the live templates and quickly checked to make sure they didn't
> obviously break anything. The
> way you've done it here is better for non-trivial changes.
>
>     2. I added a #switch that searches for Non-Standard or Deprecated (I
> could easily add more, if needed, like Obsolete, which I think should be
> added to the
>     Standardization_Status options) and adds a styled span (it would be
> better if I used a class and added it to some global CSS). Does that seem
> fine (the style could use some
>     work, of course ;))?
>
>
> Yeah, this approach seems perfect.****
>
> ** **
>
>  ** **
>
Received on Thursday, 6 December 2012 00:18:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 May 2013 19:57:36 UTC