W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > spec-prod@w3.org > October to December 2011

Re: W3C Publications Ecosystem Breakout Summary

From: Vincent Hardy <vhardy@adobe.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 11:10:43 -0800
To: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
CC: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>, "spec-prod@w3.org Prod" <spec-prod@w3.org>, "fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net" <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Message-ID: <CAE15D23.20EA7%vhardy@adobe.com>
From: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com<mailto:w3c@marcosc.com>>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 10:36:32 -0800
To: Adobe Systems <vhardy@adobe.com<mailto:vhardy@adobe.com>>
Cc: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com<mailto:robin@berjon.com>>, "spec-prod@w3.org<mailto:spec-prod@w3.org> Prod" <spec-prod@w3.org<mailto:spec-prod@w3.org>>, "fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net<mailto:fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>" <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net<mailto:fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>>
Subject: Re: W3C Publications Ecosystem Breakout Summary

On Thursday, November 10, 2011 at 7:10 PM, Vincent Hardy wrote:

I think you are thinking of ways to provide in-place feedback on the spec. Is that right?
No, I forgot about that one! but that is good one! :)


I agree this is also important, but this is not a piece I have signed up for just yet :-)

You raise a good implicit point… the initial fixes to the template must/must not be bound to tools (e.g., the bug tracker). IMO, at least for the first round, it should not be. Be cool if at the end of the first iteration we just get a CSS file and maybe some images to point to…. then we can move onto a nice UI for commenting, linking specs to test suites and to implementation reports.

I think our first iteration will be stylistic and may have a small amount of scripting that will not be bound to tools. I agree that the UI commenting should be a future step.

Received on Thursday, 10 November 2011 19:11:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:55:16 UTC