[wbs] response to 'TR Design Survey'

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

[wbs] response to 'TR Design Survey'

Doug Schepers via WBS Mailer
The following answers have been successfully submitted to 'TR Design Survey'
(public) for Arthur Barstow.

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

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> 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.
>
>
 
Links to all of WebApps' EDs are included in
<https://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/PubStatus>.  

Most EDs use ReSpec but a few EDs do have their own style such as:

Service Workers:
<http://slightlyoff.github.io/ServiceWorker/spec/service_worker/>

Web Components specs:
<http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/custom/>
<view-source:http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/shadow/>

The APIs that were originally part of HTML5, f.ex.:
<https://w3c.github.io/websockets/>
<https://w3c.github.io/webstorage/>

FIleAPI:
<https://w3c.github.io/FileAPI/>

WebIDL:
<http://heycam.github.io/webidl/>




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

 Anolis was used at one time but I think it is not used any more.

WebIDL uses XML as the source code.

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Group style sheet(s)
> ----
> Paste in URLs to any WG-specific style sheets you use.
>
>
 
Some of the spec-specific stylesheets:
https://w3c.github.io/FileAPI/FileAPI.css
http://heycam.github.io/webidl/WebIDL.css

WebComponents has several:
<https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/tree/gh-pages/assets/styles>

Some specs include stylesheets directly in the source, f.ex:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/w3c/IndexedDB/gh-pages/index.html

Some specs use JS:
https://github.com/slightlyoff/ServiceWorker/blob/master/spec/service_worker/index.html


>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Like
> ----
> What do you like about your current styles?
>
>
 
Here is what Joshua Bell, Editor of Indexed Database said about the changes
he uses:

[[
<https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2015AprJun/0787.html>

* Impose a maximum body width and center to improve readability on wide
windows +
* Increase body line spacing to ~1.45 to improve readability of dense text
+
* Size of inline <code> text should match body text size +
* Reduce vertical space taken up by note/Issue blocks +
* Size of block code samples should be at least slightly closer to body
size
* Introduce standard "switch" <dl> style

These were (of course!) inspired by some of the newer, more readable
(IMHO)
specs styles floating about.

The items marked with + above seem to already be addressed Fantasai's
http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-text-3/ (i.e. I'm borrowing from the right
people...)

]]



>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Dislike
> ----
> What do you dislike about your current styles?
>
>
 
Here is what Joshua Bell, Editor of Indexed Database said:

[[
<https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2015AprJun/0787.html>

Other notes:

* Current IDL blocks are pretty garish; I think they could use a little
*less* syntax highlighting.
* In dense algorithmic steps, the underlines on linked terms become fairly
cluttered since nearly every word is a reference. I suppose the
alternatives are color (?), style (italics is used for variables), or
weight (used for definitions). Ideas?
]]


>
>
> ---------------------------------
> 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.
>
>
 
The only feedback was from Joshua.

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> 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.
>
>
 
I am not aware of any especially complex tables but some specs have a
relatively large number of tables such as
<https://w3c.github.io/DOM-Level-3-Events-key/>.

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> 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.
>
>
 
No comment.

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Anything else?
> ----
>
>     Is there anything else we should consider?
>
>
>
 
Joshua Bell is the only Editor that provided feedback and we offer it "on
behalf of WebApps"
<https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2015AprJun/0787.html>.

>
> These answers were last modified on 17 July 2015 at 22:17:29 U.T.C.
> by Arthur Barstow
>
Answers to this questionnaire can be set and changed at
https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/tr-design-survey-2015/ until 2015-07-31.

 Regards,

 The Automatic WBS Mailer