- From: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 17:36:05 +0100
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>, "spec-prod@w3.org Prod" <spec-prod@w3.org>
On 26/03/2015 17:23 , Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 3:01 AM, Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org> wrote: >> 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 can *absolutely* assure you that it is not Bikeshed. I hate an argument from authority just as much as the next folks but given that I wrote that code I think I can make that statement with a modicum of confidence. You do note correctly that a number of Bikeshed quirks are followed. There's a reason for that: the stylesheet was initially designed to work with Bikeshed documents. It was easier to get the markup to match that than to rewrite it. -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Thursday, 26 March 2015 16:36:08 UTC