- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 09:23:52 -0700
- To: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
- Cc: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>, "spec-prod@w3.org Prod" <spec-prod@w3.org>
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 3:01 AM, Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org> wrote: > On 25/03/2015 22:52 , Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> >> On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 6:53 AM, Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org> wrote: >>> >>> Generating static versions isn't hard, for instance stuff on >>> https://specs.webplatform.org/ is commonly ReSpec in the static output. >> >> >> Note that https://specs.webplatform.org/ is Bikeshed, actually. The >> three specs under it do appear to be static output of ReSpec, though. > > > I'm not sure what you mean here Tab :) The index page there is neither > ReSpec nor Bikeshed, it's custom-generated. Of the specs there, I believe > one is Bikeshed, the others are ReSpec. The system supports both. I just checked the source of <https://specs.webplatform.org/>, and it bears the fingerprint of Bikeshed - the headings, for example, have a .settled class, and <span class=content> and <a class=self-link> children. Unless someone is *very carefully* reproducing all of Bikeshed's quirks, it's definitely a Bikeshed-processed document. I hadn't checked all of the specs listed in the index when I made my earlier statement, only the Markup ones. The URL one is indeed Bikeshed, but the other four are ReSpec. ~TJ
Received on Thursday, 26 March 2015 16:24:40 UTC