W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-geolocation@w3.org > August 2015

/TR Style Sheet Update 2016 - Survey

From: Mandyam, Giridhar <mandyam@qti.qualcomm.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2015 22:07:40 +0000
To: "public-geolocation@w3.org" <public-geolocation@w3.org>
CC: fantasai <fantasai@inkedblade.net>
Message-ID: <40a4d321d78542bda0504ce936ceddee@NASANEXM01C.na.qualcomm.com>
Hello W3C Geolocation WG,

We are overdue (my fault) in responding to the style sheet survey from the CSS Working Group.    The survey may be found at https://www.w3.org/wiki/SpecProd/Restyle/Survey.  I am providing candidate answers to the questions here, but group members have a chance to respond/modify/comment on the survey and answers.  If nothing is received by August 12, 2015, then the following responses can be considered final on behalf of the Geolocation WG.

-Giri Mandyam, Geolocation Working Group Chair

-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.




-What spec pre-processor(s) does your WG use?

Primarily ReSpec

-Paste in URLs to any WG-specific style sheets you use.

None at this time.

-What do you like about your current styles?

ReSpec is well-documented, and fairly easy to modify as necessary if one is familiar with the tool.

-What do you dislike about your current styles?

Newcomers to ReSpec encounter a variable learning curve, depending on how comfortable they are with markdown.

-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.


-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.). {NOTE:  Examples are providing in hyperlinks found on https://www.w3.org/wiki/SpecProd/Restyle/Survey). 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.

None at this time.

-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.

No comments at this time

-Is there anything else we should consider?


Received on Thursday, 6 August 2015 16:26:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:51:11 UTC