WebIDL support in ReSpec2

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

WebIDL support in ReSpec2

Gregg Kellogg
I added WebIDL support to ReSpec2 [1], equivalent to that available in ReSpec, but a new jQuery port using Robin's JavaScript WebIDLParser [2]. You can see an example of this here [3].

I believe that this was the last major piece of functionality missing from ReSpec2 to bring it in-line with ReSpec v1 features.

Gregg


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WebIDL support in ReSpec2

Robin Berjon-2
On Oct 15, 2010, at 21:12 , Gregg Kellogg wrote:
> I added WebIDL support to ReSpec2 [1], equivalent to that available in ReSpec, but a new jQuery port using Robin's JavaScript WebIDLParser [2]. You can see an example of this here [3].

Thanks a *lot* Gregg, this is great!

> I believe that this was the last major piece of functionality missing from ReSpec2 to bring it in-line with ReSpec v1 features.

Actually, the other major piece of functionality missing from v2 is better documentation :) But that can be fixed more easily.

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




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WebIDL support in ReSpec2

Cameron McCormack-4
In reply to this post by Gregg Kellogg
Hi Gregg.

Gregg Kellogg:
> I added WebIDL support to ReSpec2 [1], equivalent to that available in
> ReSpec, but a new jQuery port using Robin's JavaScript WebIDLParser
> [2]. You can see an example of this here [3].
>
> I believe that this was the last major piece of functionality missing
> from ReSpec2 to bring it in-line with ReSpec v1 features.

What advantages does ReSpec2 have over ReSpec 1?  (And should I start
using it?)

--
Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WebIDL support in ReSpec2

Gregg Kellogg
Cameron, I would say that ReSpec2 is still in alpha mode, but I'd encourage anyone to download and work with it. I use it because I'm mainly working on a non-W3C spec, and the plugable nature of it suits my needs well. This should allow for the tool to change and grow in a more organic way, as it's just a matter of adding a module to do what you want and adding it to the invocation chain. It's also an easier environment to work in as a developer to create new functionality, as it's implemented largely with jQuery and templating system based on Perl Template. For instance, I added support for section and figure references and a table of figures along with the recent work on WebIDL.

I believe that the future of ReSpec is ReSpec2, but that's really up to others to decide. You can get started by downloading it via Mercurial from https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/respec2.

As functional as the system is, there are likely issues that remain to be worked out. This will certainly involve other interested parties taking an interest in the software and moving it forward.

Gregg

On Oct 19, 2010, at 3:10 PM, Cameron McCormack wrote:

Hi Gregg.

Gregg Kellogg:
I added WebIDL support to ReSpec2 [1], equivalent to that available in
ReSpec, but a new jQuery port using Robin's JavaScript WebIDLParser
[2]. You can see an example of this here [3].

I believe that this was the last major piece of functionality missing
from ReSpec2 to bring it in-line with ReSpec v1 features.

What advantages does ReSpec2 have over ReSpec 1?  (And should I start
using it?)

--
Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WebIDL support in ReSpec2

Robin Berjon-2
In reply to this post by Cameron McCormack-4
On Oct 20, 2010, at 00:10 , Cameron McCormack wrote:
> What advantages does ReSpec2 have over ReSpec 1?  (And should I start
> using it?)

As Gregg said it's far more modular, it's meant to work on any browser, it can work for non-W3C specs, it's faster on a number of operations, the code is a lot cleaner, and it even has the beginning of a test suite. It's also largely compatible with v1, the only exceptions being:

  - whatever hasn't been ported over;
  - the way that it's linked in and configured.

The downside is that it has benefitted from nowhere near as much testing as v1, and may be buggy. We're also seeing issues with local editing due to the increasingly stringent restrictions that browser vendors place on reading from file:. I'm looking into hacks to keep it working, but we may have to require all dependencies to be loaded from the Web (possibly a local web server).

Of course, if you want to pick it up and help hack on it, we'd be very happy about that :)

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