Re: Getting started with WOFF 2.0: a template draft

Thank you for this, it's quite helpful to get me started. I'm now deep into
editing the draft, which I'm finding is mostly merging content from four
sources: the WOFF 1 TR, the Microtype Express proposal, the "WOFF Ultra
Condensed File Format" draft from a year or so back (which I'm finding is
quite rough and in need of polishing), and the reference code (I consider
the C++ encoder to now be the the source of truth for the format).

I personally am quite comfortable with old-school raw HTML editing. That's
how I've created pretty much every web site I've done, and working in a raw
text editor in one window and reloading in a browser in another is
interactive enough for this kind of thing. BlueGriffon does look like a
fine tool, though.

One item on my list is whether to expand the format to support the
equivalent of TTC's. After diving into it, I think that's probably not a
good idea, and I'll expand on my reasoning for that in a separate post.

Take care,

Raph


On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Attached is an empty (in terms of technical content) draft document
> for a WOFF 2.0 specification. It meets all the current publication
> rules (correct links to the patent policy, copyright, disclosures,
> etc) and is set up as  first public working draft for the purposes of
> checking.
>
> You change it into an editors draft by commenting out the paragraphs
> that say "First Public Working Draft" and changing the stylesheet link
> from
>   http://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-WD
> to
>  http://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-ED
>
> You will also find these tools useful:
>
> HTML5 validity checker
>   http://validator.w3.org/nu/
>
> CSS validator (can be a little flaky; if it gives errors, ask me)
>   http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/
>
> Link checker (including internal cross references)
>   http://validator.w3.org/checklink
>
> Pubrules checker
>   http://www.w3.org/2005/07/pubrules?uimode=checker_full&uri=
>
>
> Its usual to put technical documents in a version control system,
> originally at W3C CVS (I can get you CVS accounts) although more
> recently people are using Github which you may prefer (I can make a
> Github group if you prefer that). Let me know.
>
> For now, for the purposes of checking, I put it in CVS here
> http://www.w3.org/Fonts/WG/WOFF2/
> and in accordance with W3C conventions for a single-document spec it
> is called Overview.html
>
> Some things to bear in mind while editing:
>
> * all headings must have an
> id so they can be linked to directly.
>
> * Link to the references section by putting link text in square
> brackets: [WOFF 1.0] and adding a link like #ref-woff10
>
> * be aware of the difference between normative and informative
> references (the former all need to be stable by the time the document
> gets to candidate recommendation)
>
> that is all that comes to mind right now. I added a references section
> so you can see how it works.
>
> In terms of editing, and since not everyone is comfortable with
> old-school direct editing of the html source, a tool I often use
> myyself is BlueGriffon. Its free (although there are additional,
> low-cost plugins to extend the functionality) and gives a visual
> representation of the document, like a wordprocessor. The guy who
> wrote it is the co-chair of the CSS working group and it uses the
> rendering engine of the Mozilla Firefox browser, so what you see when
> editing is what it will look like when published.
>
> http://bluegriffon.org/
>
> Its cross-platform (downloads for Windows, Mac OS X or Linux).
>
> Let me know if you have questions or run into problems.
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
>  Chris                          mailto:chris@w3.org