- From: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 11:47:29 +0200
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: Steve Glaser <sglaser@nvidia.com>, "spec-prod@w3.org" <spec-prod@w3.org>
Hi Tab, On 16/09/2014 20:01 , Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> Namespacing would work basically like this. Say you have a markup attribute >> and a DOM attribute both called 'unicorn'. You could have >> <dfn>dom:unicorn</dfn> and <dfn>attr:unicorn</dfn>, and <a>dom:unicorn</a> >> would link to the right one (and drop the namespace on render of course). If >> you need a : in your dfn, \-escaping works. >> >> Alternatives would solve the common problem of referring to the same dfn >> with variants (typically, plurals) for which today one has to annoyingly >> resort to @title. For that, just use <dfn>unicorn|unicorns|long-toothed >> horse</dfn>. > > We've already solved this problem in Bikeshed/Shepherd, and it would > be a crying shame to have ReSpec try to solve it in an incompatible > way, as it would mean the two types of specs couldn't talk to each > other. I was aware that you'd solved the alternatives issues, which is why I was thinking of the same syntax, but I hadn't seen that you had the namespacing as well. That's pretty cool! In general I *completely* agree with you. I shudder to utter the sentence "standard for standards" but there are many things that it would enable. > Bikeshed's relevant documention is here: > <https://github.com/tabatkins/bikeshed/blob/master/docs/definitions-autolinks.md>. > We've got a taxonomy of dfn types, which can also be applied to > autolinks to disambiguate. There are multiple ways to specify what > type a dfn is - an explicit data-dfn-type attribute, an id matching a > particular pattern, a class (on the element or an ancestor) matching a > particular pattern, or the text of the dfn itself matching certain > patterns. Bikeshed makes this all pretty trivial and turns it > explicit in the source for you, but ReSpec specs obviously would need > to be a little more explicit about things, so that the correct > information shows up in the source html. Actually I'm pretty sure that ReSpec could support exactly the same syntax. > I'd *really* like ReSpec and Bikeshed to agree on this stuff, so that > I can autolink into ReSpec specs. Note that specref has nominal support for cross reference finding, but the data is lacking (to say the least). You, Tobie, and I should bang our heads together to make this broadly available. It's not rocket surgery. -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Wednesday, 17 September 2014 09:47:39 UTC