- From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 13:37:34 +0000
- To: Eric Stephan <ericphb@gmail.com>
- Cc: Bernadette Farias Lóscio <bfl@cin.ufpe.br>, "Purohit, Sumit" <Sumit.Purohit@pnnl.gov>, Public DWBP WG <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
On 15/01/2016 13:32, Eric Stephan wrote: > Hi Phil, > > Thanks so much for offering to fix the picture, I'm wondering if it would > be easier just to export to an image format? That might be the expedient solution, yes! Phil We are currently using the > draw.io [1] tool which makes remote collaboration a bit easier between > Berna and myself, but appears to be problematic for publication. > > What do you think? > > Eric S > Reference [1] > https://support.draw.io/questions/1671290/why-does-the-text-of-svg-export-sometimes-not-display-correctly-in-ie-and-some-svg-editors > > > > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 5:05 AM, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org> wrote: > >> Morning Eric, >> >> I've created a Pull Request that includes the fixes mentioned yesterday. >> >> We have a problem though I'm afraid. I looked at the SVG to see if I can >> make it clickable and, in the process, found that it uses some advanced >> features of SVG that are not supported by some browsers that we need to >> care about, at least a little, by which I mean IE11. So we need a new >> version of the diagram. I can create it (it's a bit of Friday coding for >> me) and I can do it in time for a Tuesday publication but I won't have it >> done before today's call. >> >> Cheers >> >> Phil >> >> >> >> >> On 14/01/2016 20:23, Phil Archer wrote: >> >>> And is this Note still relevant? >>> >>> "Based on discussions held June-August the model has been modified >>> significantly The non-normative text below needs updating once general >>> agreement is reached on the DUV model." >>> >>> >>> >>> On 14/01/2016 20:10, Phil Archer wrote: >>> >>>> Eric, Sumit, Berna, >>>> >>>> I have an idea this won't be the only question I have for you about DUV >>>> but I'm working through it and I'll jot down some observations and >>>> questions as I go. >>>> >>>> First of all, I've fixed the ReSpec errors so my copy is now OK on that >>>> score [1]. >>>> >>>> Secondly, in the Status section, the text says "This is a draft document >>>> which may be merged into another document or eventually make its way >>>> into being a standalone Working Draft." is that still true? I may be >>>> wrong but my impression is that the WG finds it easier to keep DUV and >>>> DQV separate. >>>> >>>> The Status section needs to have at least one custom paragraph, i.e. >>>> some indication of what *this* version is about, it's stability etc. >>>> *If* the following is accurate, then something like: >>>> >>>> "This is the second iteration of the vocabulary, developed following >>>> extensive consultation among and outside the working group who now >>>> regard it as nearing completion. Comment and feedback is sought before >>>> the next iteration which is likely to be the final version for the >>>> foreseeable future." >>>> >>>> would be appropriate. >>>> >>>> I'm hoping to add links to your SVG next... >>>> >>>> Phil >>>> >>>> [1] http://philarcher1.github.io/dwbp/vocab-du.html >>>> >>>> >>> >> -- >> >> >> Phil Archer >> W3C Data Activity Lead >> http://www.w3.org/2013/data/ >> >> http://philarcher.org >> +44 (0)7887 767755 >> @philarcher1 >> > -- Phil Archer W3C Data Activity Lead http://www.w3.org/2013/data/ http://philarcher.org +44 (0)7887 767755 @philarcher1
Received on Friday, 15 January 2016 13:37:21 UTC