W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > spec-prod@w3.org > January to March 2017

Re: Editor's notes

From: <marcos@marcosc.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2017 03:45:45 +1100
Cc: spec-prod <spec-prod@w3.org>, Elika Etemad <fantasai@inkedblade.net>
Message-Id: <9CC2C6B3-9512-4E02-83B2-DBD3F2B3E562@marcosc.com>
To: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>


> On 21 Feb 2017, at 3:23 am, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net> wrote:
> 
> In specs I work on (JSON-LD and others) ednote is used during development to communicate status between editors. Issues, at tied back to GitHub and cover more long-standing discussions about spec content that are usually not simple editorial points. Please keep ednote.

Just to be clear, ednotes are not going away :) the question is if we, as a community, want to see them styled differently from regular notes. 

> 
> Gregg Kellogg
> gregg@greggkellogg.net
> 
>> On Feb 19, 2017, at 6:44 PM, Marcos Caceres <marcos@marcosc.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Spec Editors,
>> 
>> Some specs feature "editors notes", which are notes that an editor
>> leaves for the reader or for themselves for whatever reason. These
>> editors notes are styled in the same way as regular notes (green box,
>> with a bold "heading").
>> 
>> We are wondering, should such editors notes be stylistically
>> distinguished from regular spec notes (and, should they be included at
>> all in specs)?
>> 
>> If the answer is "yes, they should be styled differently": then we
>> should decide on how to distinguish them in "base.css" (see [1]).
>> 
>> If the answer is "no, just keep them the same", then ReSpec will
>> automagically start to convert them to "notes" (by changing the css
>> class value to from "ednote" to "note").  If I don't hear any
>> responses, I'll assume "no" and change ReSpec to match.
>> 
>> Kind regards,
>> Marcos
>> 
>> [1] https://github.com/w3c/tr-design/issues/110
>> 
> 
Received on Monday, 20 February 2017 16:46:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:55:22 UTC