Re: Guide to implementing CSS property pages

Whoops, sent too soon.

The guide looks good!  One section that might be good to add is where to
research the information for your article and how to verify it's correct.
We could list known trustworthy sites to use for research (like MDN,
caniuse, quirksmode, etc). For example, maybe it says something like,
"review existing documentation from other sources and then read the
relevant specs. If the sources all agree then you can accept the
information as correct, but if they disagree you should do original
research or ask for help from more knowledgeable members." Is that
reasonable?


On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 8:04 PM, Alex Komoroske <komoroske@google.com>wrote:

> FYI, I've updated the sheet [1] to remove all of the special formulas that
> used to make it work--now it's just straightforward values in cells. Chris,
> you and anyone else should feel free to edit that spreadsheet to keep track
> of the work. I've added a column for owner and status, but feel free to add
> more columns and change values. (I've left the previous magic formula
> sheets in the workbook, but they're locked and out of the way).
>
>
> --Alex
>
> [1]
> https://docs.google.com/a/chromium.org/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AkRs-89PKiZpdE0xdm9Sb1ZvRW1ZRzMtWEdyU0Z4OEE#gid=14
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Mike Sierra <
> letmespellitoutforyou@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> FYI, I went ahead and punched a bunch of content into the css/units
>> space, which could probably use another category on the top-level CSS
>> page. I decided not to create a million picayune pages for each
>> individual unit, so I sliced them up into broad categories.  Also
>> decided to cover various reba() & hsla() values under that tree rather
>> than under css/functions, where I thought they'd be hard to relate to
>> each other. And I'm afraid I used the "concepts" template, which may
>> have been inappropriate.  It's all pretty skeletal & straight out of
>> the spec, so it could use more in the way of examples & other
>> improvements.
>>
>> --Mike Sierra
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Mike Sierra
>> <letmespellitoutforyou@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Chris Mills <cmills@opera.com> wrote:
>> >> Thanks for the comments guys!
>> >>
>> >> I have answered pretty much all of Mike's comments. I also agreed
>> entirely with PhistucK's comments, and have implemented a page about CSS
>> images at http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/concepts/css-images and
>> referenced it from my CSS property guide (
>> http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:CSS_property_guide). It makes a lot
>> of sense to cover concepts and other info that applies to several
>> properties, in separate pages.
>> >
>> > That point is worth stressing as part of the instructions. Authors
>> > should ask whether information they want to include for this property
>> > is also appropriate for other properties as well. In that case, link
>> > to it elsewhere.  In general, draw links within the site, even to
>> > appropriate destinations that don't exist yet.  In this case, url()
>> > and various *-gradient() functions are viable targets within the
>> > "css/functions" tree. (Either search or navigate to css/functions to
>> > research existing pages.) Or if you're describing background colors,
>> > rather than detail how RGBA/HSLA values work, you should point to
>> > css/units (caveat: that tree doesn't exist yet). If you find yourself
>> > using any other common jargon that's hard to classify & that readers
>> > might not be familiar with, create a link within the top-level
>> > "concepts" tree, e.g., "viewport," "vendor prefixes," or "standards
>> > mode." Readers may also benefit from links to tutorials on the subject
>> > available as "CSS learning material." (Other areas such as HTML,
>> > Javascript, and SVG have their own learning-material areas.)
>> >
>> > --Mike Sierra
>>
>>
>