Consolidated version of CSS extracts in Webref

[tidoust]

So, that's not an issue, I wanted to draw your attention to the consolidated version of the CSS extracts in Webref that we're now producing as part of the curation step, see tracking issue at w3c/webref#1519 and the resulting @webref/css package (pre-release version for now).

I haven't looked at your code but glancing over extract.js, you seem to be doing something similar here out of raw Webref data. Plus you've also been exploring CSS syntax inconsistencies for some time now. I'm wondering whether you might have comments on the approach. For example, does the consolidated file align with the data you compute on your own? Is something missing that makes the file useless for your use case? Anyway, feedback welcome ;)

[cdoublev]

Thanks for letting me know and asking for my feedback. I posted a comment in your tracking issue.

I definitely plan to replace w3c/webref#commit with @webref/css at some point (so let's keep this issue open) but having control over the curation gives me more flexibility for now.

I think our approaches are the same when it comes to deduplication. They only differ in the authority given to some specs over others, mostly - or maybe only - SVG2 over unimplemented CSS specs. Combining definitions from delta specs is also straightforward.