W3C Publications Ecosystem Breakout Summary

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

W3C Publications Ecosystem Breakout Summary

Robin Berjon-2
Hi all,

during TPAC we had a number of breakout sessions one of which was of particular interest to this group: W3C Publications Ecosystem.

You can find a quick summary of what was discussed there at: http://www.w3.org/wiki/TPAC2011/W3C_Publications_Ecosystem. The full minutes are at: http://www.w3.org/2011/11/02-pubs-minutes.html

The actions are came out from this were:

• fantasai and vhardy: create concrete proposal for a new and better spec template for W3C
• fantasai to start best practices doc for editing specs

But a variety of other things were discussed that are likely to lead to more in the medium term future. If you weren't there and are interested I strongly recommend reading up on what we talked about!

--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: W3C Publications Ecosystem Breakout Summary

Karl Dubost-5

Le 10 nov. 2011 à 06:05, Robin Berjon a écrit :
> • fantasai to start best practices doc for editing specs

Note a few existing things, that could help

http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/
http://www.w3.org/2003/Editors/
http://www.w3.org/TR/qaframe-spec/


--
Karl Dubost - http://dev.opera.com/
Developer Relations & Tools, Opera Software


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: W3C Publications Ecosystem Breakout Summary

Robin Berjon-2
On Nov 10, 2011, at 15:21 , Karl Dubost wrote:
> Le 10 nov. 2011 à 06:05, Robin Berjon a écrit :
>> • fantasai to start best practices doc for editing specs
>
> Note a few existing things, that could help
>
> http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/
> http://www.w3.org/2003/Editors/
> http://www.w3.org/TR/qaframe-spec/

And http://www.w3.org/TR/test-methodology/.

I'm unsure what the best way forward is here. There's already a lot of material, and editors report that it's overwhelming when they get started, but at the same time reducing it loses a lot of good stuff.

--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: W3C Publications Ecosystem Breakout Summary

Karl Dubost-5

Le 10 nov. 2011 à 09:35, Robin Berjon a écrit :
> I'm unsure what the best way forward is here. There's already a lot of material, and editors report that it's overwhelming when they get started, but at the same time reducing it loses a lot of good stuff.


I would say more documentation doesn't solve it.
But implementing bits of these documents in tools
will help people to use them. And when it is
implemented not forgetting a link back to the
original document with a question mark or something
so people understand the context of the tool feature.

--
Karl Dubost - http://dev.opera.com/
Developer Relations & Tools, Opera Software


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: W3C Publications Ecosystem Breakout Summary

Marcos Caceres-4
In reply to this post by Robin Berjon-2


On Thursday, November 10, 2011 at 12:05 PM, Robin Berjon wrote:

> • fantasai and vhardy: create concrete proposal for a new and better spec template for W3C
> • fantasai to start best practices doc for editing specs


I would strongly encourage looking at the WHATWG document:  
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/

Before any "concrete proposal" is made, I would like to make sure all the requirements are captured:  

 e.g., needs to link to test suite, drops snapshots/dates, clearly shows status (overall, section) based on implementations(!) not on "um, we think its done but have no data to back that", etc. etc.  

Do we have a list or requirements? Where can we capture them?  

--  
Marcos Caceres




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: W3C Publications Ecosystem Breakout Summary

Marcos Caceres-4
In reply to this post by Robin Berjon-2


On Thursday, November 10, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Robin Berjon wrote:

> I'm unsure what the best way forward is here.  


Requirements … and use cases :)  

--  
Marcos Caceres




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: W3C Publications Ecosystem Breakout Summary

Vincent Hardy-4
In reply to this post by Marcos Caceres-4
Hi Marcos,

From: Marcos Caceres <[hidden email]>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 09:58:53 -0800
To: Robin Berjon <[hidden email]>
Cc: "[hidden email] Prod" <[hidden email]>, "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>, Adobe Systems <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: W3C Publications Ecosystem Breakout Summary



On Thursday, November 10, 2011 at 12:05 PM, Robin Berjon wrote:

• fantasai and vhardy: create concrete proposal for a new and better spec template for W3C
• fantasai to start best practices doc for editing specs


I would strongly encourage looking at the WHATWG document:  

Before any "concrete proposal" is made, I would like to make sure all the requirements are captured:  

e.g., needs to link to test suite, drops snapshots/dates, clearly shows status (overall, section) based on implementations(!) not on "um, we think its done but have no data to back that", etc. etc.  

Do we have a list or requirements? Where can we capture them?  

I think the 'concrete proposal' is more limited in scope than what the summary may imply. We are going to look at two things:

a. improving the styling of the specifications for improved legibility. We are working with two designers, one of them is Ben Schwartz who has worked on the following already (http://developers.whatwg.org/)
b. improving the boiler plate section of the spec.

I think you are thinking of ways to provide in-place feedback on the spec. Is that right? I agree this is also important, but this is not a piece I have signed up for just yet :-)

Vincent
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: W3C Publications Ecosystem Breakout Summary

Marcos Caceres-4



On Thursday, November 10, 2011 at 7:10 PM, Vincent Hardy wrote:

>  
> I think you are thinking of ways to provide in-place feedback on the spec. Is that right?  
No, I forgot about that one! but that is good one! :)  
> I agree this is also important, but this is not a piece I have signed up for just yet :-)

You raise a good implicit point… the initial fixes to the template must/must not be bound to tools (e.g., the bug tracker). IMO, at least for the first round, it should not be. Be cool if at the end of the first iteration we just get a CSS file and maybe some images to point to…. then we can move onto a nice UI for commenting, linking specs to test suites and to implementation reports.    

--  
Marcos Caceres




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: W3C Publications Ecosystem Breakout Summary

Vincent Hardy-4
From: Marcos Caceres <[hidden email]>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 10:36:32 -0800
To: Adobe Systems <[hidden email]>
Cc: Robin Berjon <[hidden email]>, "[hidden email] Prod" <[hidden email]>, "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: W3C Publications Ecosystem Breakout Summary




On Thursday, November 10, 2011 at 7:10 PM, Vincent Hardy wrote:

  
I think you are thinking of ways to provide in-place feedback on the spec. Is that right?  
No, I forgot about that one! but that is good one! :)  

:-)

I agree this is also important, but this is not a piece I have signed up for just yet :-)

You raise a good implicit point… the initial fixes to the template must/must not be bound to tools (e.g., the bug tracker). IMO, at least for the first round, it should not be. Be cool if at the end of the first iteration we just get a CSS file and maybe some images to point to…. then we can move onto a nice UI for commenting, linking specs to test suites and to implementation reports.    

I think our first iteration will be stylistic and may have a small amount of scripting that will not be bound to tools. I agree that the UI commenting should be a future step.

Cheers,
Vincent
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: W3C Publications Ecosystem Breakout Summary

Robin Berjon-2
In reply to this post by Marcos Caceres-4
On Nov 10, 2011, at 19:36 , Marcos Caceres wrote:
> You raise a good implicit point… the initial fixes to the template must/must not be bound to tools (e.g., the bug tracker). IMO, at least for the first round, it should not be. Be cool if at the end of the first iteration we just get a CSS file and maybe some images to point to…. then we can move onto a nice UI for commenting, linking specs to test suites and to implementation reports.

The action that Vincent and Fantasai got is indeed strictly stylistic. There is a completely separate project to provide rich tools for specifications. That one is up for whoever wants to grab it. I don't think that use cases and requirements are the way to go for this at this stage — I think the scratch the itch methodology would work much better :)

--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: W3C Publications Ecosystem Breakout Summary

Marcos Caceres-4



On Friday, November 11, 2011 at 2:53 PM, Robin Berjon wrote:

>  
> The action that Vincent and Fantasai got is indeed strictly stylistic. There is a completely separate project to provide rich tools for specifications. That one is up for whoever wants to grab it. I don't think that use cases and requirements are the way to go for this at this stage  
I don't want to use the "polish a turd" metaphor, but I think I just did :)  

Without stylistic design goals, making things pretty won't get us nowhere. Each stylistic change should be motivated by a design goal that meets some requirement (otherwise, it's not "design", it's just mindless styling). I know Fantasai and Vincent have specification experience and know all this already, so of course they won't do that (i.e., they will work with some requirements and goals in mind). I just want to make sure we know what they are, so we can make sure as many of the requirements as possible are covered.  
> — I think the scratch the itch methodology would work much better :)

True. But I wanna know what's itching', why, and how it's going to be scratched… and evidence that the itching has been reduced to a tolerable level (or gone all together).

So, we know that the largest weeping sore in a spec is the SoTD: looking forward to seeing some ointment being applied to it. I think the current "BIG FAT RED BOX - THIS IS CHANGING!!!!" used by HTML5 is a good start to healing that:

http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/   
 
--  
Marcos Caceres