Skip to content
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

Align new TR design with latest requirements #558

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Feb 9, 2016
Merged

Conversation

plehegar
Copy link
Member

@plehegar plehegar commented Feb 9, 2016

  • removed width = content-width from viewport
  • add fixup.js

halindrome added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 9, 2016
Align new TR design with latest requirements
@halindrome halindrome merged commit 5c43d75 into develop Feb 9, 2016
@plehegar plehegar deleted the plh/2016-design branch February 9, 2016 18:46
statStyle === "LC-NOTE") statStyle = "WD";
if (statStyle === "FPWD-NOTE") statStyle = "WG-NOTE";
if (statStyle === "finding" || statStyle === "draft-finding") statStyle = "base";
var fixup = "null";
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Note, there is a bug here. it is set to the string "null", but later you check if it's null.

@marcoscaceres
Copy link
Member

@plehegar, @halindrome, I'm not comfortable with this module and feel it should be backed out. I can see that it was kinda slapped together quickly and I don't think it's release quality (e.g., duplicates code, lacks tests, doesn't adhere to new coding conventions).

Apart from using the "experimental" style, it seems that updating js/w3c/style.js would actually be the right thing to do here.

@marcoscaceres
Copy link
Member

Another question: is this module time sensitive?

@halindrome
Copy link
Contributor

@plehegar asked me to to a release with this module yesterday, so I pushed it. TBH I didn't even review it for quality. I had the impression from IRC that it was needed right then so I just did it. I don't mind backing it out, but I want a reaction from @plehegar first.

marcoscaceres added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 15, 2016
This reverts commit 5c43d75, reversing
changes made to 91592c3.
marcoscaceres added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 16, 2016
This reverts commit 5c43d75, reversing
changes made to 91592c3.
shikhar-scs pushed a commit to shikhar-scs/respec that referenced this pull request Feb 19, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants