- From: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 14:53:35 +0100
- To: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>, "spec-prod@w3.org Prod" <spec-prod@w3.org>
On 23/03/2015 14:17 , Shane McCarron wrote: > I know that many of you think that having the editor's drafts rely upon > ReSpec is okay, but we get complaints from users who rely upon assistive > technologies that it is unacceptable / unworkable for them. Do you have specific issues that you reckon could be fixed there? > The PFWG > has been using gh-pages to present static versions of documents, but has > been generating them by hand. Can anyone suggest a convenient way, > maybe using Travis, to automate generation of a static gh-pages version > when the master is updated? Generating static versions isn't hard, for instance stuff on https://specs.webplatform.org/ is commonly ReSpec in the static output. In terms of automation Travis is indeed probably your best bet. If you search you'll find plenty of examples. Perhaps the simplest (that I've seen) is this one: https://medium.com/@nthgergo/publishing-gh-pages-with-travis-ci-53a8270e87db. Note that you don't even have to use some locally-installed ReSpec tooling with Travis, you can use the spec-generator service, e.g.: https://labs.w3.org/spec-generator/?type=respec&url=https://w3c.github.io/linkToYourSpec/?specStatus=WD;shortName=theShortName The output from that is the generated spec. -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Monday, 23 March 2015 13:53:39 UTC