W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > spec-prod@w3.org > October to December 2014

Re: [restyle] Questionnaire wrt Redesign of the W3C Spec Templates

From: Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 09:18:03 +0000
To: David Singer <singer@apple.com>, Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
CC: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "team-rdf-chairs@w3.org" <chairs@w3.org>, spec-prod <spec-prod@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D063F9D0.145A0%nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
On 14/10/2014 18:08, "David Singer" <singer@apple.com> wrote:

>
>On Oct 14, 2014, at 9:28 , Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com> wrote:
>
>> Isn't that the table of contents?
>
>That is a full-depth header-only view.  I am suggesting we can do
>interactive folding to the depth needed, either for sections at a time,
>or for the whole document

Mathematica!

+1 for this presentation style - it would certainly make navigating
complex documents and concepts easier, especially if accompanied by a
style guide that says "Start with general concepts at header level, work
into detail in subsections", which while obvious to some, isn't always
done.


>
>> 
>> On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 11:15 AM, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:
>> sounds awesome.
>> 
>> Another thing that might make online reading great would be folding.  I
>>wonder how it would feel to have (a) ‘twist-downs’ on each header, to
>>show/hide the contents and (b) some way to say that for the whole
>>document, I want to see headers of say sections 1, 2, 3, and the header
>>and content of 1.1, 2.1, 3.1, but not 1.2…
>> 
>> So, assuming each chapter has an intro sub-section, this gives you an
>>overview of the document.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Oct 14, 2014, at 3:03 , Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org> wrote:
>> 
>> > On 13/10/2014 19:53 , David Singer wrote:
>> >> For a spec. of any size, I think we could do much better at providing
>> >> (automatically) navigation help etc.  Perhaps that includes the
>> >> multi-page/one-page choices.  For me it also includes (a) knowing
>> >> where anchors are, so I can point at them from the outside (if they
>> >> are not part of the index, it’s not evident they are there).
>> >>
>> >> Something that is probably more than ReSpec and is surely more than
>> >> styling would be to make it much easier to know where concepts are
>> >> used — ‘backlinks’ (this anchor is referred to from X, Y, Z), and so
>> >> on.
>> >
>> > About a year ago I spent some time hacking on a small script called
>>"specstatic":
>> >
>> >    https://github.com/darobin/specstatic

>> >
>> > I haven't had time to pursue it properly, but the goal was to offer
>>out of the box enhancements for all specs (not just ReSpec generated,
>>anything that relies on some minimal conventions), including:
>> >
>> >  - Built-in dialog to submit new bugs
>> >  - Make all headers easily linkable with a permalink indicator
>>(though that might be best supported by generators directly)
>> >  - Make <dfn> popup a list of places where the definition is used.
>> >  - Make bibrefs link back to their usage instances.
>> >  - Inject a more readable style than what is used on TR that people
>>could optionally turn on (and that would stick through a cookie).
>> >  - Highlight other instances of a variable in an algorithm when one
>>is hovered.
>> >
>> > And likely a bunch of other niceties that I forget about. I will
>>probably return to it at some point, in the meantime feel free to grab,
>>fork, dissect, replace, etc. if you think it's useful.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
>> >
>> 
>> David Singer
>> Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>
>David Singer
>Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 15 October 2014 09:17:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:42:21 UTC