Re: RSP call 22.1.2016

Github is quite appropriate for developing an HTML-based document.

The HTML spec you referenced uses bikeshed to generate their spec. I 
don't necessarily have a problem using bikeshed, but I did see this page 
on W3C

https://www.w3.org/community/reports/reqs/

which suggests (but doesn't require) ReSpec

https://www.w3.org/respec/

The community group reports that have already been published are here:
https://www.w3.org/community/reports/

and ReSpec does indeed seem quite popular with these groups (as can be 
seen by looking at the HTML source).
For a recent example consider

http://webtiming.github.io/timingobject/

It has a nice "W3C Community Group Draft Report" logo, and some fancy 
formatting.

Tara

On 1/21/16 5:43 PM, Jean Paul Calbimonte wrote:
> Happy new year!
>
> We have a scheduled call tomorrow at 15:00 CET.
>
> As it was done last time, the skype group will be used: 
> https://join.skype.com/nRbgWpxbeloT
>
> Following the discussion of 2 weeks ago, we thought that it makes 
> sense to focus on putting our two deliverables in publishable shape, 
> consolidating them as Group reports.
>
> The two deliverables are:
>
>   * RSP Overview document:
>       o It will be based on our draft here:
>         https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bXPD5OTebOR7SckgIyoFFB_kLAerfvI1pBgot0izO3
>       o Will include general motivation, requirements, and general
>         recommendations/guidelines for a data model and query language
>         for RSP.
>       o Not a strict specification, so we can remove definitions,
>         especially those that overlap with the (more up to date) RSP
>         model on github.
>       o We can refine the examples of the proposed idea of query
>         language that we drafted. Even if we have no resources (time)
>         to define the semantics of the language now, we can point to
>         the works that define possible semantics of these language
>         constructs.
>       o For all query features that we present, we can (should) point
>         to the requirement (and if possible the use case) that it
>         answers to.
>   * RSP model document:
>       o based on the github draft here:
>         https://github.com/streamreasoning/RSP-QL/blob/master/Semantics.md
>       o would focus on the model part that has been discussed and
>         agreed on
>       o would go up to the window function definitions which are
>         essential to describe the model.
>       o would be interesting to integrate the examples currently under
>         discussion.
>
>
>
> We also discussed about practical issues, including templates and 
> repositories for these drafts. I think it would make sense to use a 
> W3C template (html).
> We can discuss more about that tomorrow, but I see that many groups, 
> even working groups are using github for this, e.g. see the HTML group 
> draft: https://github.com/w3c/html
> I think it is quite convenient for the type of workflow we have.
>
>
>
>
>
> Cheers,
> Jean-Paul
>