-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 55
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Allow a collapsible SotD section #1919
Comments
A good number of pubrules' checks are related to the SotD which lists some important bits (stability of the document, IPR, process document, etc). Most web developers won't care about that section but it's not clear to me if we could/should make it less visible. Also, having a ![]() /cc @plehegar |
The style problem, aside maybe from some margin collapsing, is fixed with <details><summary style="list-style-position:outside">
<h2 style="display:inline-block">... Documents that want to do this could keep that style inline if folks don't think it belongs in the main stylesheet. I think it's important that the information be there, but that most readers are skipping over this section anyway when they look at our documents. |
Yes, this is absolutely skippable boilerplate for almost everyone. Being collapsible (and collapsed by default) would be ideal. |
I'm ok with this but we should probably do some sanity checks before implementing. In the case of a REC track document, the status of the document contains information that are legally binding for the reader for example. |
If I edit a spec to turn the
into
it starts failing pubrules with There must be a status section that follows the abstract, labeled with an h2 element with content "Status of This Document". The Team maintains the status section of a document. Obviously there is a status section here; Specberus just doesn't know to look inside the
<details>
for it.I'd like to do this for https://w3ctag.github.io/explainers/, where ideally people reading it would start their experience by looking at the document's actual content, and not the W3C's metadata.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: