W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > spec-prod@w3.org > April to June 2021

Re: How to find all spec editors in my company?

From: Jeffrey Yasskin <jyasskin@google.com>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2021 21:52:27 -0700
Message-ID: <CANh-dX=sp1kqHiGBwT=iPSg7B2eWbfJbkh6axVYT=LygM-pSdQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
Cc: Marcos Caceres <marcosc@w3.org>, spec-prod <spec-prod@w3.org>
Thanks! This list looks useful, and it caused
https://github.com/w3c/media-source/pull/271 so far.

I can scan https://chromestatus.com/ for specs that aren't in
browser-specs. An initial run finds ~300 possible URLs, but a lot of those
are abandoned, not specifications, or stage 4 (i.e. merged) javascript
features. Some of the remaining ones are IETF documents that we probably
should figure out how to include.

Jeffrey

On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 9:51 AM Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org> wrote:

> Le 05/05/2021 à 07:19, Dominique Hazael-Massieux a écrit :
> > Reffy is made to run on the list of specs maintained in browser-specs
> > [5] - if your crawl needs to run on a different list, some further
> > customization might be needed (happy to help with them).
>
> I've ended up hacking my way through this [1] (very much a
> work-in-progress), which has made it possible to extract editors and
> their affiliations from 313 specs, with a few miss (whose affiliation
> appear as "undetermined" in the attached data - available both as JSON
> and CSV).
>
> This is still very much a ad-hoc process, and more importantly, it
> extract data "only" from 313 specs in browser-specs [2], which means
> both that there are a few browser-specs specs from which it couldn't
> extract the information, and more importantly, that it isn't looking at
> the many known W3C specs that aren't in browser-specs, and even less so
> at the many other specs (e.g. from CGs) that aren't in browser-specs.
>
> It would be relatively easy to add the known W3C specs that aren't in
> browser-specs; much harder to get data from other CGs specs since I
> don't think we have a good mechanism to track their existence at this
> point (although the data collected by the CG monitor [3] might be a
> starting point).
>
> I'll wait to see if this data is useful and used before looking into
> making the whole thing more robust.
>
> Dom
>
>
> 1.
> https://github.com/w3c/reffy/blob/spec-crawler/src/cli/extract-editors.js
> with the extracted data post-processed with
> https://gist.github.com/dontcallmedom/290986d35a8991a163f805e1692ff53a
> 2. https://github.com/w3c/browser-specs
> 3. https://w3c.github.io/cg-monitor/
>
Received on Wednesday, 12 May 2021 04:53:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 12 May 2021 04:53:54 UTC