- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 15:13:15 -0700
- To: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>
- Cc: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 2:26 PM, James Graham<jgraham@opera.com> wrote: > Quoting James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>: > >> To meet the goal of informing readers of the spec about the likely >> stability of different sections, we are much better off adding >> informative annotations to each section that describe the stability of >> that section using criteria such as whether the feature is supported in >> released user agents. Such annotations would be both positive "Ships in >> multiple UAs; likely to be stable" and negative "Unimplemented, likely >> subject to change or removal". It is notable that the WHATWG draft >> already has a system for doing this based on user-supplied information. >> It would not (I expect) be a technical challenge to statically add >> those annotations to the W3C version of the spec. > > Indeed it turned out that this was not a significant technical challenge; I > added a simple feature to anolis that allows reading annotations from a file > in a format compatible with the WHATWG annotation system and adding them > statically to the generated spec. I have not added this feature to > pimpmyspec.net yet but will in due course. > > A copy of the spec with the WHATWG annotations in is at [1] (that URL is not > expected to be long-lasting). Note how this document makes the relative > maturity of the <iframe> ("working draft") and <video> ("last call for > comments") sections clear. I understand that some people will think that > reusing W3C language is inappropriate; that can be changed. Please bear in > mind that this document may contain errors since my spec-processing pipeline > is immature; indeed I spotted some encoding issues already. Wow, this is great! I'd say I'd even prefer even more attention to the status annotations, i.e. give them a border or something else to make them stand out. / Jonas
Received on Thursday, 13 August 2009 22:14:16 UTC