Re: [css3-color] #rrggbbaa annotation, do we need to change the ?process?

On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Eduard Pascual <herenvardo@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 5:35 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Or, you know, you could write it.  ^_^
>
> I was expecting that. Actually, I was going to volunteer when I
> suggested it, but two things prevented me from doing so:
> 1) I had some stuff to do this morning; so I just left it as a
> suggestion thus leaving open the chance that someone could have
> something done before I came back.
> 2) If I write it, it will still need some review from people with
> better knowledge on the topic than me.
>
> I'll get into it right now, taking WHATWG's FAQ as a guideline for
> content structure and the pages on the CSS site as the guideline for
> markup/layout. I'm hoping to drop something here for review within
> then next 24h.

A bit later than expected, but here it goes ^^
Note that this should be properly reviewed by the WG before going
"live": my knowledge on the processes is quite limited, and most of
what I've included is information available from either the W3C
website or this thread.
Also, it's based on what *I* thought would be the stuff potential
contributors would need/like to know, so it may be worth reviewing by
other contributors to see if something should be added/removed.

My original intent was to include all the "boilerplate" html code to
mimic the CSS site's design; but that would have been highly
error-prone and would have bloated the document; so I hope you have
some kind of template you can apply to it.

Regards,
Eduard Pascual