Re: [ReSpec] UNOFFICIAL DRAFT background

I believe that the watermark recently regressed (with this PR
<https://github.com/w3c/tr-design/pull/224>, I believe).

It used to be confined to the head of the document (see here
<https://web.archive.org/web/20200817071047/https://wicg.github.io/largest-contentful-paint/>),
but now covers the entire document (example
<https://wicg.github.io/largest-contentful-paint/>), including the ToC and
the document body, making it barely legible, particularly so in dark mode
(see attachment).

We should fix this.

On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 2:40 PM Martynas Jusevičius <martynas@atomgraph.com>
wrote:

> Thanks Marcos.
>
> What is the "CG-DRAFT" status for then?
>
> On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 1:16 AM Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Martynas,
> >
> > To echo what Chris said, the watermark is by design: it's part of the
> "official" W3C style sheet for all Community Group drafts and not something
> ReSpec imposes.
> >
> > Nevertheless, it's the best the W3C community has come up with so far,
> but we are open to suggestions.
> >
> > As an alternative, you can use `specStatus: "unofficial"` in your
> document, that will only display the watermark across the top (keeping the
> body legible) and also remove the W3C logo. That makes it possible to share
> the document around with less potential of it being confused with having
> official standing at the W3C.
> >
> > Hope that helps!
> >
> > > On 13 Nov 2020, at 9:54 am, Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > There has been continued feedback from some that the misperception of
> unofficial drafts - despite the Status section - is an ongoing issue.  cf
> https://github.com/w3c/tr-design/pull/177,
> https://github.com/WICG/admin/issues/132,
> https://github.com/WICG/admin/issues/64.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 2:25 PM Martynas Jusevičius <
> martynas@atomgraph.com> wrote:
> > > I get that. That is also what the "Status of This Document" explains
> > > clearly. What I don't get is why the background image has to be
> > > plastered all over the document making it unreadable?
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 11:23 PM Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Because anything that is a Community Group product is not an
> "official specification" (i.e., the product of a consensus-driven Working
> Group on the REC track).
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 2:14 PM Martynas Jusevičius <
> martynas@atomgraph.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> body { background-image: none !important; } did the trick.
> > > >>
> > > >> Still don't understand what's the point of it.
> > > >>
> > > >> On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 11:01 PM Martynas Jusevičius
> > > >> <martynas@atomgraph.com> wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Hi,
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Why does UNOFFICIAL DRAFT background appear on Community Group
> drafts
> > > >> > (CG-DRAFT)?
> > > >> > It makes the text illegible. How do I remove it?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Examples:
> > > >> > https://atomgraph.github.io/Linked-Data-Templates/
> > > >> > https://atomgraph.github.io/RDF-POST/
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I'm certain it wasn't there last year:
> > > >> >
> http://web-old.archive.org/web/20191209025246/https://atomgraph.github.io/Linked-Data-Templates/
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Best,
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Martynas
> > > >> > atomgraph.com
> > > >>
> >
>
>