- From: Boley, Harold <Harold.Boley@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca>
- Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 18:33:26 -0500
- To: "Sandro Hawke" <sandro@w3.org>
- Cc: "RIF WG" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Hi Sandro, my responses are inlined, starting in the first column. * You added another level of hierarchy, with CORE/Conditions/Positive Is that something that's important to you? I'd rather have the wiki pages under the document node just be titled as the section is titled, in general. But I can change the code the handle the hierarchy if you think it's helpful. As mentioned offline, it is important to us since there are a few more sections and subsections planned starting from the CORE root. If you could expand the code for one more level that would be great and could benefit future W3C documents. BTW, is wikitr open source or will it be? Parameterizing the CSS could make it a great universal tool, and could make a difference in the HTML-authoring role of wikis. * There's shared text between http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/CORE/Conditions and http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/CORE/Conditions/Positive I assume that's an oversight? I guess you are mostly referring to the bulleted lists about FO, LP, PR, RR, IC, QY: Yes, I will deal with this redundancy, likely eliminating it from .../Conditions/Positive. * These Back/Root/Next links are kind of nice, but very un-wiki-like and likely to end up broken. I think if the sections are all like CORE/Horn_Rules then people will figure out to go up to CORE if they are lost, and there they will see the outline of all the sections. I can comment out the navigation links again if there is no easy way for wikitr to ignore certain parts of the wiki source. * Is there an idea behind the all-caps name CORE? No. But, when we realized that some would have preferred Core, there were already links to CORE from several other pages, and since yesterday there are even more. Best, Harold
Received on Monday, 11 December 2006 23:33:41 UTC