- From: Hallvord R. M. Steen <hsteen@mozilla.com>
- Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2014 22:46:25 -0800 (PST)
- To: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Cc: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>, www-archive@w3.org
Thanks for the review and hints, Robin! I suppose it's better now? :) http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/clipops/clipops.html Arthur: please start the process to publish a snapshot for this. There are 4 or 5 anolis-references left that I need to sort out (referencing stuff in dom/dom events that I just don't have time to look up right now, but I'll probably get it done before the snapshot is due). Haven't put in the right dates (this/previous..) either, but that's of course trivial. -Hallvord ----- Original Message ----- From: "Arthur Barstow" <art.barstow@nokia.com> To: "Hallvord R. M. Steen" <hsteen@mozilla.com> Cc: "Robin Berjon" <robin@w3.org>, www-archive@w3.org Sent: Friday, February 28, 2014 11:15:20 PM Subject: Re: Publishing a new WD of Clipboard API and events spec On 2/28/14 7:59 AM, ext Hallvord R. M. Steen wrote: > Well, for whatever reason I've ended up using both ReSpec and Anolis, the latter eventually only to add some cross-references which I haven't figured out if/how ReSpec can do. > So yes, it is an "Anolis spec" but only sort of :-p Hallvord - Robin looked at the source code (thanks Robin!) and he reported: [[ Looking at the source, this seems to me that it is 98% a ReSpec document, with a few Anolis things sprinkled on. I haven't pubruled it, but this looks like it would be at least pretty close to being a proper WD: http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/clipops/clipops-source.html?specStatus=WD There are essentially two things that would ideally be fixed to make it ship cleanly: • There are a few instances of <hN> elements that aren't in their own <section>. That's bad practice in general, and in the case of ReSpec it causes them not to be numbered and included in the ToC. • At least one of those has a "This section is informative" bit included. That could be removed, and just add class=informative on its parent section. • There are a few cases of data-anolis-spec=html. The best way to fix this is to have a section that says: <p>The following items are defined in the HTML specification. [[!HTML5]]</p> <ul> <li><dfn><a href='link to #feature'>foo</a></dfn></li> ... </ul> and then for each instance, instead of <code data-anolis-spec='html'>foo</code> just use <a>foo</a>. There's an example of the same in: http://darobin.github.io/formic/specs/json/ I *think* that should be enough. ]] Based on Robin's info, it seems like the "right/best" way forward (in the long term) is to remove all of anolis and make it 100% ReSpec, although that would not necessarily need to be done before a new version of a WD is created. In the short-term, perhaps the URL Robin gives above could be expanded a bit to create a draft WD: <http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/clipops/clipops-source.html?specStatus=WD;publishDate=2014-03-06;previousPublishDate=2013-04-11> And a Ctrl+Alt+Shift+S saved version of that could then be updated per the validators (<https://www.w3.org/wiki/Webapps/SpecEditing>) to create the WD for publishing. WDYT? -Thanks, Art
Received on Monday, 3 March 2014 06:46:54 UTC