This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
— |
design:20140930-notes [2014/10/02 05:47] (current) rsewikiadmin created |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
+ | Attending: | ||
+ | Heather, Sandy, Tony, Paul, Nevil, Julian | ||
+ | |||
+ | Apologies: | ||
+ | Robert, Adam, Dave, Ted, Joe | ||
+ | |||
+ | 0. Agenda bash | ||
+ | |||
+ | 1. XML v3 draft | ||
+ | * inline text as < | ||
+ | " | ||
+ | |||
+ | Julian: We already have a way to mark up something to be monospaced in open text. Another aspect is control over whitespace. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Paul: some of what you mentioned might also be useful outside of code. If we’re going to add attributes to elements for running text, we should add them to all of them. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Julian: I support doing this, and this can be done, but we need some research on how to do it best. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Paul: this would be a set of features for a small set of authors. | ||
+ | |||
+ | **Julian and/or Joe need to come up with concrete proposals on what we want done and how to do it, and we bash from there.** | ||
+ | |||
+ | * any further discussion on tables | ||
+ | |||
+ | In the current draft, very purposefully has it that a table always has a caption, which is not true for figures. | ||
+ | |||
+ | How is this diff from a figure? | ||
+ | |||
+ | **Julian: if Julian can demonstrate that a caption is not required for a table, then we don’t need to make tables different from figures. If Julian can’t do this, would prefer to be have to figure out a link to a table rather than have authors come up with captions for tables so there can be easy links. ** | ||
+ | |||
+ | Paul: figures and tables can have captions with no names, and things will work fine. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Paul: **Wants design team to esp. look at description of tables and comment on rfc-interest.** | ||
+ | |||
+ | Tony: not sure how common post and preambles are in existing documents. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Julian: not sure they do in practice? | ||
+ | |||
+ | Paul: from a semantic point of view, don’t see them in typical publishing at all as a semantic difference, so explaining this to an author will be unnecessarily complicated. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Tony: looking at the HTML spec, tfoot happens after thead. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Julian: tfoot can follow thead, but it an also come before; it doesn’t matter as long as there is just the one. Paul: ok, will leave alone unless the spec is inconsistent. | ||
+ | |||
+ | 2. Examples draft | ||
+ | |||
+ | Tony and Paul talked about this yesterday. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Reminder that this is not a tutorial. | ||
+ | |||
+ | 3. Draft status | ||
+ | * XML v2 - ready to start the pub process? Yes. | ||
+ | * HTML | ||
+ | |||
+ | Joe and Paul talked a bit about this this weekend, and he is trying to make sure he understand what the XML to HTML conversion will look like, because the current thought is that the XML to HTML converter should have to create anything new. It should be able to do direct conversions. | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | Hope to have something out at the end of the week. If we have been squeaky clean on the XML for HTML, the same should be true for PDF. | ||
+ | |||
+ | * SVG | ||
+ | |||
+ | Posted a revised version (-08) mostly in response to the GenART review. | ||
+ | |||
+ | * plain text | ||
+ | |||
+ | -03 posted; biggest change is pagination | ||
+ | |||
+ | * CSS | ||
+ | |||
+ | 4. AOB | ||
+ | |||
+ | Paul: the v3 document will have some vagueness and holes unless we figure out the relationship with I-Ds. Since there is a difference between the RFC processor and draft processor that need clarification. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Heather: will be discussing this f2f with Jari, Russ, and others next week |