- From: Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2017 21:53:54 -0500
- To: Marcos Caceres <marcos@marcosc.com>, spec-prod <spec-prod@w3.org>
- Cc: Elika Etemad <fantasai@inkedblade.net>
For me keeping the concept of editors' notes separate from regular notes is important. Regular notes are interpretive guidance about the spec features. Editors' notes are statements about the production of the spec, such as "this is incomplete", "we really want input on this", etc. My practice is to remove editors' notes by Rec (and don't mind if Pubrules wants to enforce that), and I make sure they're pretty minimal from CR on, but in Working Draft I use them a lot. I'm agnostic about the style, for me the different note header is enough but see value in a greater style differentiation. I would not want to lose the feature from Respec. Michael On 2/19/2017 9:44 PM, Marcos Caceres wrote: > Hi Spec Editors, > > Some specs feature "editors notes", which are notes that an editor > leaves for the reader or for themselves for whatever reason. These > editors notes are styled in the same way as regular notes (green box, > with a bold "heading"). > > We are wondering, should such editors notes be stylistically > distinguished from regular spec notes (and, should they be included at > all in specs)? > > If the answer is "yes, they should be styled differently": then we > should decide on how to distinguish them in "base.css" (see [1]). > > If the answer is "no, just keep them the same", then ReSpec will > automagically start to convert them to "notes" (by changing the css > class value to from "ednote" to "note"). If I don't hear any > responses, I'll assume "no" and change ReSpec to match. > > Kind regards, > Marcos > > [1] https://github.com/w3c/tr-design/issues/110 >
Received on Monday, 20 February 2017 02:54:02 UTC