W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-secondscreen@w3.org > July 2015

Re: [presentation-api] Spec authoring tool migration

From: Mark Foltz via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 00:58:34 +0000
To: public-secondscreen@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-121793060-1437008312-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
I took a look at these two alternatives.  The main differences that I 
can see:

- ReSpec works directly in the browser (update cycle is edit-reload).
  Bikeshed requires a local processing tool and makefile (update cycle
 is edit-make-reload).
- Publication with ReSpec requires a manual step - saving the 
generated HTML in a file.  I think this is reasonable.
- ReSpec expects well formed HTML.
- Bikeshed uses a simplified syntax including some support for 
- Both support cross references within the spec and references outside
 the spec using SpecRef [1]

Overall I am leaning towards the tool that makes it easiest for new 
contributors to get up to speed, and makes the editor's job easier.  
Being able to iterate on the spec without a separate processing step 
seems like a clear win, so I propose we adopt ReSpec.

[1] https://github.com/tobie/specref

GitHub Notif of comment by mfoltzgoogle
Received on Thursday, 16 July 2015 00:58:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:18:57 UTC