- From: Pierre-Antoine Champin <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr>
- Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 14:37:49 +0100
- To: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
- CC: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, public-rdf-wg <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
+1 for hg as well (and to the recommended read by Michael) @danbri: for what I read, HTML5 has an XML syntax: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/introduction.html#html-vs-xhtml which is basically the XMLization of the DOM tree. I don't know if there are any good XHTML-to-HTML5 stylesheet out there, though pa On 04/29/2011 02:11 PM, Michael Hausenblas wrote: > >> So the basic w3.org website remains CVS-backed, as I understand it. >> For most group Web pages, the Wiki seems a reasonable alternative, >> especially for freeform / rough notes work. >> >> For the actual specs and test case repository, I'd like to give >> Mercurial a go. Can't claim to be an advocate but I'm quite liking >> using Git lately, and the two systems are similar >> (http://www.w3.org/blog/systeam/2010/06/16/why_we_chose_mercurial_as_our_dvcs/ >> ). > > +1 for hg and for those who still don't believe in DVCS I'd suggest > reading [1] - esp. the 00 section ;) > > Cheers, > Michael > > [1] http://hginit.com/ > > -- > Dr. Michael Hausenblas, Research Fellow > LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre > DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute > NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway > Ireland, Europe > Tel. +353 91 495730 > http://linkeddata.deri.ie/ > http://sw-app.org/about.html > > On 29 Apr 2011, at 14:03, Dan Brickley wrote: > >> On 29 April 2011 14:51, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> wrote: >>> Thinking about it some more, I think respec is almost entirely >>> orthogonal to revdoc (my publication-from-the-wiki system); they >>> overlap >>> in generating the boilerplate at the top of the document, but >>> revdoc can >>> just overwrite respec's boilerplate if necessary, and rewrite the >>> links >>> during publication as necessary as well. >>> >>> So, I think the real questions are: >>> >>> 1. Version control: CVS, Mercurial, or Wiki? >> >> So the basic w3.org website remains CVS-backed, as I understand it. >> For most group Web pages, the Wiki seems a reasonable alternative, >> especially for freeform / rough notes work. >> >> For the actual specs and test case repository, I'd like to give >> Mercurial a go. Can't claim to be an advocate but I'm quite liking >> using Git lately, and the two systems are similar >> (http://www.w3.org/blog/systeam/2010/06/16/why_we_chose_mercurial_as_our_dvcs/ >> ). >> >>> 2. Authoring format: Mediawiki markup, or HTML5-with-<sections>. >>> This >>> includes how the bibliography is done. >> >> Is there a reasonable stable XHTML-friendly flavour of HTML5? >> >> Dan >> >>> I have no opinion, myself, on these questions. >>> >>> -- Sandro >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > >
Received on Friday, 29 April 2011 13:38:18 UTC