Skip to content

Conversation

@jyasskin
Copy link
Contributor

@jyasskin jyasskin commented Jun 10, 2025

This is meant to fix #6. Also see #19 for some frustration that I used as input.

It's still fairly rough, and I'm expecting to refine it based on feedback. @slightlyoff and @alice, you're likely to have comments.


Preview | Diff

@torgo
Copy link
Member

torgo commented Jun 17, 2025

I like where this is going – AND I feel we should leave room for spec developers to maintain a separate explainer if that's how they want to operate, as long as they keep it up to date.

index.bs Outdated
Comment on lines 55 to 57
Start your specification using whatever tool you prefer
(e.g. [Bikeshed](https://speced.github.io/bikeshed/) or [Respec](https://respec.org/)).
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This seems a bit out of place to me. I think most (?) spec writing is in the form of edits to existing specs, or at least additional documents in an existing collection, meaning that the choice of tool is not really up to the author.

Copy link
Contributor

@matatk matatk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, modulo:

  • ACK @alice's suggestion that maybe the tool choice shouldn't go here (though is there a place it could/should go?)

  • I +1'd @alice's wording for lines 57-59, which I think should be merged in.

jyasskin and others added 2 commits June 25, 2025 09:42
Co-authored-by: Alice <95208+alice@users.noreply.github.com>
@jyasskin
Copy link
Contributor Author

Breakout B was happy with the latest version of this PR. I'll merge at the end of June 26 if I don't hear other comments/objections.

Copy link

@marcoscaceres marcoscaceres left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Seems good to me.

@jyasskin jyasskin requested a review from matatk June 26, 2025 18:51
@jyasskin jyasskin merged commit 6e6adaf into w3ctag:main Jul 2, 2025
1 check passed
@jyasskin jyasskin deleted the lifecycle branch July 2, 2025 06:30
github-actions bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 2, 2025
SHA: 6e6adaf
Reason: push, by jyasskin

Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Discuss the lifecycle of explainers

5 participants