W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webplatform@w3.org > April 2013

Re: *DRAFT* Seeking CSS Review of Web Platform Docs

From: Julee <julee@adobe.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 08:56:19 -0700
To: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>, "public-webplatform@w3.org" <public-webplatform@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CD8D7CA4.6F798%julee@adobe.com>
Yes! Thanks. J


----------------------------
julee@adobe.com
@adobejulee





-----Original Message-----
From: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
Date: Friday, April 12, 2013 8:24 AM
To: "public-webplatform@w3.org" <public-webplatform@w3.org>
Cc: julee <jburdeki@adobe.com>
Subject: *DRAFT* Seeking CSS Review of Web Platform Docs

>Hi, folks-
>
>I've felt uneasy about sending this "call for review", and I think I've
>figured out why... I think we should first discuss how we are going to
>organize and track review from CSS folks, to make sure that it's
>systematic and actionable.
>
>Can we discuss this during the call today?
>
>Thanks-
>-Doug
>
>========
>Hi, folks-
>
>You may have heard of WebPlatform.org, our community-driven,
>multi-stakeholder effort to make a reusable, vendor-neutral "Wikipedia
>for Web Developers and Designers".
>
>We're still in alpha phase, but we have been focused on improving our
>CSS documentation, through the efforts of individuals in the community
>and representatives from the companies involved. We are now at the point
>where we would like to get review and sanity checks from CSS aficionados
>and experts. And where better to find them than on www-style?
>
>If you are willing to review even one page, that would be a great help.
>We welcome general comments, as well as comments on:
>* correctness and validity of information
>* completeness of information
>* usability and structure of articles (too much information? not enough?
>presented in the wrong order?)
>* general utility of presentation
>
>If you also find yourself correcting mistakes and even creating
>examples, tutorials, or articles... so much the better!
>
>If you are willing to participate in this review, please get in touch
>with Julee Burdekin (CCed), who will be coordinating the review to make
>sure that the right articles get the right amount and type of review.
>
>If you know others who would be willing to do this review, please feel
>free to pass this email along!
>
>
>After we incorporate your review and have solid docs, we will ask for a
>second round of review from the editors of the specification themselves,
>to make sure that we have captured the nuances of the features.
>
>Once the documentation is refined and polished, the main task will be
>updating it with new information and new technologies. At this point, it
>will be much easier to manage and to get help from spec editors and
>working groups in guiding doc development for emerging specs, which will
>in turn make it easier for you (and an even wider set of designers and
>developers) to be informed about these new technologies and to learn how
>to use them... and to provide feedback into the functionality.
>
>We are very excited by the prospect of having this active, living
>feedback loop, and we hope you can help us make it happen.
>
>Regards-
>-Doug Schepers
>W3C Developer Relations Lead
>
Received on Friday, 12 April 2013 15:56:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:13:45 UTC