Marcos Cáceres

Another thing might be to create a `data-cite=` fixer-upper-rrrerr... that we can run specs through and it automagically converts `data-cite=` to the appropriate syntax.

Hi @edsu, including it should be fine. Would you mind removing the changes to the `build/` directory? Those should only get generated during deployment.

ok, cool - appreciate you taking the time to send these fixes. Will wait for update on the tests. Any issues, just give us a shout.

We need to design it so that stuff from WGs doesn't end up in CGs tho... maybe we should keep them separate :( The risk goes the other way.

Hi @pchampin, it should be super easy to add at: https://github.com/w3c/respec/blob/e693644fe4b36091a8d310d5b93d909b6a1b16da/src/core/render-biblio.js#L227 Would you mind sending a pull request? Otherwise I’ll try to add it next week.

Thank so much @pchampin 🙏. If it's not too much trouble, please add a simple test. You can probably just copy/paste or modify this one: https://github.com/w3c/respec/blob/e693644fe4b36091a8d310d5b93d909b6a1b16da/tests/spec/core/biblio-spec.js#L77-L82 And either add "carroll-2003"...

> The solution probably involves using a parser like parse5 or htmlparser2, does anyone have some experience with them? Not me, unfortunately.

I think we should maybe remove the image sizing code from ReSpec... it's trying to be clever where it probably shouldn't be.

I think this would be awesome, but might require more time and resources than we have available... like, we would either need to either support saving to disk (Chrome only)...

Problem is things getting out of sync. Imagine multiple editors working together: Once a PR gets merged on Github and you reload in the browser, it would be difficult to...