[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 Norman Walsh.

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

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> 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/xproc-v2-req/
http://www.w3.org/TR/xproc20/
http://www.w3.org/TR/xproc20-steps/

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Specification Processor(s)
> ----
> What spec pre-processor(s) does your WG use?
>
>
 
I'm not sure I understand the question. We mostly produce HTML from DocBook
with a bit of customization in both the markup and the transforms.


>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Group style sheet(s)
> ----
> Paste in URLs to any WG-specific style sheets you use.
>
>
 
http://www.w3.org/TR/xproc20/xproc.css

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Like
> ----
> What do you like about your current styles?
>
>
 
As long as the appearance is clear and consistent, I don't feel strongly
about the specifics. Our WG-specific style is mostly about displaying
function and step markup.

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


>
>
> ---------------------------------
> 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.
>
>
 
Step summaries:

http://www.w3.org/TR/xproc20-steps/#c.http-request

and function declarations

http://www.w3.org/TR/xproc20/#f.step-available

are probably about as complex as we get.

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> 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'm perfectly happy to generate any table markup you like.

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> 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.
>
>
 
They look fine to me. Consistency FTW.

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


>
> These answers were last modified on 30 July 2015 at 22:19:35 U.T.C.
> by Norman Walsh
>
Answers to this questionnaire can be set and changed at
https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/tr-design-survey-2015/ until 2015-09-01.

 Regards,

 The Automatic WBS Mailer