Just as an experiment to see how the procedure could be improved. Of
course, xsf could implement it if you are inclined to do it. Although,
you'd have to be aware of the costs of doing that.
On 30/03/15 16:55, Kevin Smith wrote:
On 29 Mar 2015, at 02:36, Jefry Lagrange <[email protected]> wrote:
Hello everyone,
I found myself thinking about the process of proposing and editing xeps that
the xsf implements. I think there are some improvements that could be made in
order to make the process easier.
These are the main areas which I think are problematic with the current way of
doing things:
• git has a learning curve.
• xml has a learning curve.
• scripts are necessary to convert the xml to readable documents.
• Everything is tracked in the same project (scripts, templates, xeps).
XEPs aren't tracked as individual projects.
These problems aren't that grave, after all, most of us are developers.
However, I think it is worthwhile to explore alternatives to make it easier.
I spent the past week working on a wiki page that closely resembles the look
and feel of xeps.
Here is the url: http://jlagrange.net/wiki/index.php/Category:Extensions
In that week, I learned that by developing your own mediawiki skins and
extensions, you are able to make a wiki look however you like.
Because wikis were made specifically to track and modify documents, they have
some features could be useful for us.
• view and compare history of changes online
• user management to allow authors to modify their xeps and nothing
more. Or to allow trusted users to help Peter.
• rss of changes
• easier to edit and see the results without using scripts to convert
it to html
• discussion pages for each xep
At the very least it could serve a way to make quick prototypes and get
feedback.
Hi Jefry,
What’s your expected response to this? That is - are you posting it as a FYI
thing for folks to look at, or are you proposing this as an update to XSF
procedures?
/K
