- From: JOSE MANUEL CANTERA FONSECA <jmcf@tid.es>
- Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 12:57:33 +0200
- To: Robin Berjon <robin@robineko.com>, "public-device-apis@w3.org" <public-device-apis@w3.org>
- Cc: Marcos Caceres <marcosc@opera.com>
Hi Robin, As you say and having some experience with this selecting the format for writing the spec is very important and none of the existing formats are perfect. Particularly XMLSpec is evil :) The idea of using HTML 5 as an authoring format and use scripting for generating the final content is interesting, but what would happen if the user has disabled scripting in the browser? Best Regards -----Mensaje original----- De: public-device-apis-request@w3.org [mailto:public-device-apis-request@w3.org] En nombre de Robin Berjon Enviado el: jueves, 06 de agosto de 2009 1:50 Para: public-device-apis@w3.org CC: Marcos Caceres Asunto: Editing specifications with ReSpec.js Hi all, one of the annoying decisions one has to make when editing a specification is which tool to use to generate the final, PubRules compliant HTML. I don't intend to impose a solution on this — it is up to editors to decide collectively — but I would like to suggest my favourite option: ReSpec.js. Its chief advantage is that it does not require running any external tool, one simply edits an HTML document according to some conventions, reloads it in the browser, and voilà. It also has built-in support for WebIDL, which'll come in handy for us. Unless you hit a bug it should provide you with PubRules compliant HTML very easily (the checker complains about a couple small things, but I would think that they're wrong). I won't bend your ear longer than necessary here, you can read more about it at: http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/ReSpec.js/documentation.html and in general poke around http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/ReSpec.js/ to see what it's made of. Enjoy! -- Robin Berjon robineko — setting new standards http://robineko.com/
Received on Thursday, 6 August 2009 10:58:15 UTC