- From: Simon Pieters <zcorpan@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 01 May 2007 23:53:39 +0200
- To: matt@builtfromsource.com, public-html@w3.org
On Tue, 01 May 2007 22:36:33 +0200, Matthew Ratzloff <matt@builtfromsource.com> wrote: >> I think that would lead to a lot of repeated content and cross- >> references, for little practical benefit. And it's a lot of extra >> work for tour future editors. I'd like to leave it to their judgment >> how much to split the spec, unless there are major practical benefits >> to splitting out some particular section that outweigh the cost. >> Splitting document and user agent conformance requirements would be >> probably one of the most difficult splits to do. > > Nah. You have a complete document for implementors and a much smaller > document containing the allowed tags and usage guidelines for content > authors. Content authors have no need or desire to view implementation > details. They want to know what tags, attributes, and attribute values > are allowed and what they do. A second, smaller document detailing the > changes from HTML 4 would also be helpful to them. For what it's worth... I've been working on a style sheet for the HTML5 spec that selects everything that does not apply to authors. I believe this is a lot less work than creating two specs, but still achieves the goal of hiding irrelevant stuff from authors. It's not completed yet, and it might not be fully correct or up-to-date, but I hope that it will be helpful, especially since such a thing has been requested multiple times in this mailing list. For now it just grays out parts instead of hiding them completely. Contributors are welcome. I can move it to somewhere where it is easy to contribute if there's anyone interested in doing so. It's here for now (if I move it I will make it redirect): http://simon.html5.org/temp/author-view-of-html5.css -- Simon Pieters
Received on Tuesday, 1 May 2007 21:53:45 UTC