W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > January to March 2003

Re: Comments for WD-rdf-syntax-grammar-20030123

From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 11:10:27 +0000
To: Susan Lesch <lesch@w3.org>
Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <6859.1046776227@hoth.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>

>>>Susan Lesch said:
> 
> Here are minor editorial comments for your "RDF/XML Syntax
> Specification (Revised)" Last Call Working Draft [1] to use or not, as
> you see fit.

Thank you.  I will take these editorial comments, not recording as
a last call issue on the document.

I've one thing that is more feedback to W3C doc production than
related to your comments, but it reminded me.  You said:

<snip/>
> The grammar CSS is nicely done.

I did spend some time looking around the CSS styles in various docs
(latest TRs at the time and the draft manual of style) to see what to
do where examples were needed - large blocks of (possibly monospace
formatted) examples outdented with captions, extra information.

I eventually decided to use some CSS styles taken from XML Schemas,
slightly modified.  My concern was that the colours combinations I
used were accessible enough - with high-enough contrast, suitable for
printing, so tha they were as usable as possible.  For example the
use of red=bad, green=good is probably not a good idea for people
with red/green sight problems, but might be with a key and use of
<u>?

The figures 1 & 2 in [1] use black-on-red and black-on-green which
again might be a bad combination?

> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-rdf-syntax-grammar-20030123/

Maybe I worry too much!

Dave
Received on Tuesday, 4 March 2003 06:11:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:31 GMT