[Standards] XEPs in Pretty Colours.

Dave Cridland dave at cridland.net
Wed Nov 12 15:05:01 CST 2008

I appreciate that this is almost inexcusably trivial, but bear with  

On the Council list, Peter Saint-Andre happens to mention the  
potential confusion of having both Standards Track XEPs and  
Informational XEPs (and there's others) all in the same series.

This has hit the IETF, too - everyone refers to an RFC as a  
"Standard", even though many RFCs aren't standards at all - in fact,  
strictly speaking, very few indeed are - see RFC 1796 for a  
discussion. (And that RFC is not a standard, either).

So to make it more obvious, I suggested colour coding the different  
XEPs. The remainder of this email is what I sent to the Council list  
- I'd be interested in people's opinions, although I'm not  
desperately interested in *which* colours, precisely. Something I've  
noticed is that the XSF's logo can now be retromemed into symbolizing  
the various streams of documents we produce. :-)


Perhaps we could consider styling them differently - I'm put in mind  
of the UK Government (and probably elsewhere, too) practise of "white  
papers", "green papers", etc, and wondering whether we literally  
follow that practise - so Informational documents would "go white"  
when they went Active, and documents in the "working" phase of the  
lifecycle - Experimental and Proposed - would be Green. It's probably  
worth making Proposed blue, such that it's a "blueprint" of the  

For the various "failure" states, I'd simply pick grey.

For Standards Track documents, I quite like the idea of Final  
documents "going gold", and that just leaves Draft, which for no good  
reason I'll pick Pink.

This yields:

Retracted, Deferred, Rejected, Deprecated, Obsolete -> #7F7F7F
Active -> #FFFFFF
Experimental -> #CFEFCF
Proposed -> #AFCFFF
Draft -> #FFEFEF
Final -> #FFFFCF

These colours can live in the side margins of the document, so  
there's a very clear visual indicator of the status of the document.

And this can be accomplished reasonably easily with a minor XSL and  
CSS tweak, which I've attached in patch form.

Dave Cridland - mailto:dave at cridland.net - xmpp:dwd at dave.cridland.net
  - acap://acap.dave.cridland.net/byowner/user/dwd/bookmarks/
  - http://dave.cridland.net/
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: xmpp-spec-colours.diff
Type: text/x-diff
Size: 1729 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20081112/69ccbe40/attachment.diff 

More information about the Standards mailing list