- From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
- Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2010 14:51:20 +0100
- To: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
- Cc: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>, Spec Prod <spec-prod@w3.org>
On Feb 17, 2010, at 00:38 , Doug Schepers wrote: > I've chatted with Robin about it, and he was open to the idea, though of course we differed on some of the markup and styles. I'm sure these are not insurmountable issues. I'm all for supporting these. It's mostly a matter of actually getting around to doing it. > Robin, any further thoughts on the latest draft? Is there something I can do to help get these into ReSpec? I very much like it and plan to support it. The thing with ReSpec is of course that it'll use shorter ways of declaring the same stuff (which will expand to the more complex stuff). The best you can do to get these into ReSpec would be to actually write the code :) It's in CVS and all, and everyone can contribute! I would guess that step (1) would be to have it inject the right CSS, and then progressively replace what ReSpec generates with the styles in the draft. After that, we'll need to define conventions for WebIDL (ReSpec has a bunch of those which we might want to reuse as they are far more detailed than the ones in the proposed conventions). -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
Received on Wednesday, 17 February 2010 13:51:55 UTC