tooling: HTML & ecmarkup versions of the spec
allen at wirfs-brock.com
Tue Aug 11 15:47:59 UTC 2015
On Aug 10, 2015, at 6:03 PM, Michael Dyck wrote:
> On 15-08-10 03:14 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
>> There is also now a bugzilla component for ticketing rendering bugs in
>> the HTML version of the ES6 spec:
>> I encourage anybody who sees glitches in the HTML version to report the
>> bugs there.
> While converting the HTML spec into ecmarkup, I found roughly 100 glitches
> (depending on what and how you count), but I'm disinclined to report them,
> given that:
Have you checked them against http://ecma-international.org/ecma-262/6.0/ ?
It would be useful to know how many I have already fixed and also additional things I missed.
> (a) like I said, I'm doubtful that es-spec-html will ever be used again, and
> (b) if it is, I'd supposedly be the one fixing it, so creating bugzilla
> entries would just be making extra work for myself.
We can make formatting corrections to http://ecma-international.org/ecma-262/6.0/ if there are significant deviations from the PDF. Your list sounds like it would be useful in auditing for that.
It isn't necessary to submit 100 bugzilla tickets. Any reason format of a list that can be checked against the document would be useful. If you want you can just send it to me and Brian.
> If, instead, the next spec is generated from the ecmarkup doc, then all
> those glitches are already fixed.
>> Of course, what we really want is for the post-HTML to only negligibly
>> differ from the PDF (which is the definitive version).
> Indeed, but I think it'd be tough to come up with an automated means of
> usefully reporting the differences between the two. Any ideas?
Postscript level comparisons of renderings after pagination normalization? Doesn't sound easy...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss