DAP questionnaire response re /TR Style Sheet Update 2016

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

DAP questionnaire response re /TR Style Sheet Update 2016

Frederick Hirsch
fantasai,

Here is the /TR style sheet response from the Device APIs WG (DAP). I am sending the text version as I have already completed the web questionnaire on behalf of the Web Annotation WG.

regards, Frederick

Frederick Hirsch
Chair, W3C XML Security WG

www.fjhirsch.com
@fjhirsch

----- start ---

>
> ---------------------------------
> Group
> ----
>
> On behalf of which W3C Working Group are you answering this survey?
>
>
>

Device APIs (DAP), http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Sample(s)
> ----
> Paste in URLs to a representative sample (1-3 links) of your specs. If
> styling differs substantially between /TR and your editor's drafts,
> please link to both versions.
>
>

Vibration API  http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/REC-vibration-20150210/

Battery Status http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/CR-battery-status-20141209/

Generic Sensor API http://w3c.github.io/sensors/



>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Specification Processor(s)
> ----
> What spec pre-processor(s) does your WG use?
>
>

ReSpec

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Group style sheet(s)
> ----
> Paste in URLs to any WG-specific style sheets you use.
>
>

None

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Like
> ----
> What do you like about your current styles?
>
>

highlighting of notes and example blocks within spec, clear (rely on ReSpec)

familiar with format

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Dislike
> ----
> What do you dislike about your current styles?
>
>

Status section could be clearer for different sections

print version can cut off text that goes off page

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Complex style
> ----
> Paste in URLs to any parts of your spec that are stylistically complex or
> tricky, and we should therefore be careful not to screw up.
>
>

WebIDL display is important

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Table style
> ----
> The new styles will include rules for rendering data tables. These will
> be opt-in by class name, and rely heavily on good markup (use of THEAD,
> TBODY, COLGROUP, scope attributes, etc.). See Simple Example, Less Simple
> Example, and Extra-Complex Example. Paste in URLs to a sampling of any
> data tables you are using so that we can try to accommodate those in the
> styling, if practical.
>
>

None

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> CSS WG Style
> ----
> The CSSWG has made a number of minor improvements to the existing spec
> styles, which we might just adopt wholesale. Please comment on what you
> like/dislike about these styles, as demonstrated in the CSS3 Text
> specification.
>
>

not familiar with this

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Anything else?
> ----
>
>    Is there anything else we should consider?
>
>
>

Need to make sure styles work and are incorporated with ReSpec.

Some old specs need to be maintained, easier to minimize changes if old styles are still available etc to minimize differences.
Need way to specify 'use legacy', perhaps by year. (e.g. generate diff without changes due to styling...)

>
> These answers were last modified on
> by
>

=== end ===