- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 14:59:18 +0200
- To: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>
- CC: public-html@w3.org
James Graham wrote: > ... > This is now done; it is possible to generate the HTML5 spec with static > inline status markers (pulled from the WHATWG annotation system) and > ISSUE markers pulled from tracker (currently OPEN and RAISED issues; it > should be no problem to add PENDING REVIEW if necessary). Some sample > output is at [1]. My branch of anolis, and hence http://pimpmyspec.net, > has gained the ability to add these annotations and pimpmyspec.net also > gained the ability (at [2]) to generate a combined annotations/issues > file of the type needed as input when adding issue markers to a spec. > > ISSUE/section associations are picked up from tracker by looking for > strings in the description field of the form: > > HTML5-SPEC-SECTIONS [section1 section2 section3] > > i.e. a magic identifier followed by a square-bracket-enclosed, > space-separated list of ids. > > I suggest that we add such status/issue markers to the W3C versions of > the spec henceforth. This would seem to address many of the points made > in favour of publishing the "warnings" draft in the recent poll without > tripping over the substantial objections. > ... James, thanks a lot for putting this together. Ian, thanks for incorporating it. Manu, thanks for triggering the discussion. And, Maciej thanks a *lot* for the work on actually getting the number of open issues down. BR, Julian
Received on Monday, 24 August 2009 13:00:02 UTC