W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > August 2015

[wbs] response to 'TR Design Survey'

From: Dave Cramer via WBS Mailer <sysbot+wbs@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2015 15:42:01 +0000
To: dauwhe@gmail.com,www-archive@w3.org
Message-Id: <wbs-56d4aefab91e257a4abb84b9afc2289f@w3.org>
The following answers have been successfully submitted to 'TR Design Survey'
(public) for Dave Cramer.

> 
> ---------------------------------
> Group
> ----
> 
> On behalf of which W3C Working Group are you answering this survey?
> 
> 
> 
 
Digital Publishing Interest Group

> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Sample(s)
> ----
> Paste in URLs to a representative sample (1-3 links) of your specs. If
> styling differs substantially between /TR and your editor's drafts,
> please link to both versions. 
> 
> 
 
http://w3c.github.io/dpub-pagination/priorities.html
http://w3c.github.io/dpub-pagination/index.html
http://w3c.github.io/aria/aria/dpub.html
http://www.w3.org/TR/dpub-metadata/

> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Specification Processor(s)
> ----
> What spec pre-processor(s) does your WG use?
> 
> 
 
Both bikeshed and respec 

> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Group style sheet(s)
> ----
> Paste in URLs to any WG-specific style sheets you use.
> 
> 
 
We don't have a IG-specific stylesheet; we sometimes add custom CSS to
individual documents

> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Like
> ----
> What do you like about your current styles?
> 
> 
 
I like how issues and notes work. Propdef tables and the associated DLs
look great. 

> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Dislike
> ----
> What do you dislike about your current styles?
> 
> 
 
I've found I generally need to write additional styles to handle tables
other than things like propdev tables.

> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Complex style
> ----
> Paste in URLs to any parts of your spec that are stylistically complex or
> tricky, and we should therefore be careful not to screw up.
> 
> 
 
We do tend to use lots of levels of heads (at least down to h5) and at
least with Bikeshed we don't get a visual distinction between TOC entries
for h4 and h5. See TOC at
http://w3c.github.io/dpub-pagination/priorities.html

> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Table style
> ----
> The new styles will include rules for rendering data tables. These will
> be opt-in by class name, and rely heavily on good markup (use of THEAD,
> TBODY, COLGROUP, scope attributes, etc.). See Simple Example, Less Simple
> Example, and Extra-Complex Example. Paste in URLs to a sampling of any
> data tables you are using so that we can try to accommodate those in the
> styling, if practical. 
> 
> 
 


> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> CSS WG Style
> ----
> The CSSWG has made a number of minor improvements to the existing spec
> styles, which we might just adopt wholesale. Please comment on what you
> like/dislike about these styles, as demonstrated in the CSS3 Text
> specification.
> 
> 
 
The people I've talked to in DPUB are in general very happy with how the
CSS specs look, and think they're much cooler than other W3C specs :)

> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Anything else?
> ----
> 
>     Is there anything else we should consider?
> 
> 
> 
 
I'm not sure this is a style issue, but in general I've wondered about how
to handle numbering figures, especially when they may be inside an example.
Publications from this group often involve relatively complex examples with
both code and sample renderings. 

> 
> These answers were last modified on 4 August 2015 at 15:41:13 U.T.C.
> by Dave Cramer
> 
Answers to this questionnaire can be set and changed at
https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/tr-design-survey-2015/ until 2015-09-01.

 Regards,

 The Automatic WBS Mailer
Received on Tuesday, 4 August 2015 15:42:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 4 August 2015 15:42:07 UTC