- From: Frederick Hirsch <w3c@fjhirsch.com>
- Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 16:01:53 -0400
- To: Tobie Langel via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Cc: public-device-apis@w3.org
Tobie To me the most important thing is that we get a draft down so we can start working through concrete changes to reach consensus - if ReSpec works for you then I would suggest using it; also that is consistent with our other deliverables to date. As you say, the cost is low if we need to transition later. (Rich can you please remind me offline of the significant benefits of using bikeshed rather than ReSpec? ) thanks regards, Frederick Frederick Hirsch Chair, W3C Device APIs WG (DAP) www.fjhirsch.com @fjhirsch > On May 13, 2015, at 3:55 PM, Tobie Langel via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org> wrote: > >> You can get auto-generation from source using a setup like > whatwg/streams does. > > Indeed. Fwiw, a similar setup can be achieved for ReSpec using either > PhantomJS or jsdom. > > Again, what's important now is not to bikeshed (sorry) the tools used > but to actually start writing the spec, which I'll be much more > confortable doing with a tool I'm familiar with. We can always change > editor at a later stage if there's a compelling reason to do so; the > cost of migrating isn't that high. > > -- > GitHub Notif of comment by tobie > See https://github.com/w3c/sensors/pull/17#issuecomment-101795758 >
Received on Wednesday, 13 May 2015 20:02:27 UTC