[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 Paul Grosso.

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

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> 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.
>
>
 
http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/CR-xinclude-11-20150630/
http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-xml-20081126/

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Specification Processor(s)
> ----
> What spec pre-processor(s) does your WG use?
>
>
 
Not sure what this means.  We create specs in XML using the XMLspec DTD and
XSLT stylesheets and automatically generate the HTML (and diffs).  We make
both the XML and HTML available when we publish.  See
https://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#useful-info

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Group style sheet(s)
> ----
> Paste in URLs to any WG-specific style sheets you use.
>
>
 
See the previous answer for the XSLT used by the published XML.  The
(auto-generated) published HTML uses the standard W3C ones, e.g.,
http://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-CR.css with perhaps a few overriding
CSS styles.

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Like
> ----
> What do you like about your current styles?
>
>
 
They work just fine, and have for years.  

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Dislike
> ----
> What do you dislike about your current styles?
>
>
 
Nothing.

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> 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.
>
>
 
Our specs rarely have particularly tricky parts.

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> 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.
>
>
 
We don't have a lot of tricky tables.

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> 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?
>
>
>
 
What's most important to us is to be able to continue to create our specs
using the XMLspec DTD and publish both the XML and auto-generated HTML.  We
consider the XML the authoritative version.

>
> These answers were last modified on 29 July 2015 at 14:34:20 U.T.C.
> by Paul Grosso
>
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