- From: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2021 11:28:35 -0400
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, spec-prod@w3.org, Denis Ah-Kang <denis@w3.org>
On 9/9/2021 11:35 PM, fantasai wrote: > On 8/17/21 2:11 PM, Philippe Le Hegaret wrote: >> All, >> >> I've been working on the templates for the upcoming new Process 2021. >> >> Process 2021 is currently sitting at: >> https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/Drafts/snapshots/2021-07-16 >> >> (scheduled to be adopted in mid-September) >> >> You can see the work in progress at: >> https://w3c.github.io/tr-design/p2021mockup/ >> >> We're still looking at them so things are subject to change. >> >> You'll notice that those draws on previous ideas. >> >> I welcome feedback here. > > Thoughts: > > * The "details about this document" section should stay uncollapsed by > default, since people new to our specs aren't aware that we do things > like have dated URLs and link to places for feedback. (I would love to > have all this compacted, but that's going to require some actual design > skills. In the meantime, let's not hide important information.) If we > want a JS-supported setting that tracks whether your latest preference > was open or closed, and sets it accordingly onload, though, that would > be fine. > See https://github.com/w3c/tr-design/issues/145 This is done. Denis had to tweak the JS a bit more but it should work. > > * As I mentioned earlier, pulling out the Group(s) info from SOTD into > the header would be much better just tweaking the wording of the > sentence within SOTD. “This document was published by the Web > Performance Working Group as a Candidate Recommendation Snapshot using > the Recommendation track” would then be redundant with info in the > header and can be deleted. > https://github.com/w3c/tr-design/issues/205 > https://github.com/w3c/tr-design/issues/204 While I agree pulling the Group would remove the sentence, we're ready to that yet. The list of info headers is getting longer and longer as it is. Let's see how the deployment of the new info headers go and tweak again down the road. Note that we're switching to use the default homepages, ie w3.org/groups/wg/* . We're seen more groups switching to use those pages instead of having a dedicated page (and that page is accessible from the default homepage). Goal is to target the general public first, so having consistent pages for them is important. > * I'd love it if we could pull the process and legal stuff into its own > section so it's not mixed up in SOTD. > https://github.com/w3c/tr-design/issues/221 That would make the above-the-fold page longer. As you know, legal already expressed a desire to keep this information up there. Again, let's see how the new deployment go and see how it goes. Note that nothing prevents subsection in the SOTD so there is certainly room for experimentation here, without infringing on pubrules. > * I still believe strongly that “A list of current W3C publications and > the latest revision of this technical report can be found in the W3C > technical reports index at https://www.w3.org/TR/” should die. Not yet. We need to move the link to /TR something else. > * I really like that you're linking the status at the top to an > explanation of what that status means. But it should go someplace more > specific than the top of the document. Please include an anchor to the > status abbreviation, and put anchors for each of those abbreviations in > the header of whatever section is the best one to land one. Done. Revision of /standards/types is still happening. > * Commit History doesn't go under "Feedback", it goes under "History". > * "Pull requests" doesn't need to be there. That's not part of the requirements of pubrules, ie the templates don't mean to impose one way or the other. This comes from respec. > Thanks for your work on this~ Sorry for taking so long on this. Philippe
Received on Wednesday, 27 October 2021 15:28:39 UTC