> On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 7:46 PM Lassi Kortela <xxxxxx@lassi.io> wrote:
>> Just realized: Do you mean that you'd eventually want to publish a
>> standard syntax for static type signatures as part of the SRFI
>> submission guidelines, so that authors of new SRFIs could directly write
>> their own types in that syntax if they want to?
>
> The short answer: no.  I don't think it is feasible;  nor will Arthur
> accept it, neither will the other editors want to go with it.

OK, sorry for any possible mischaracterization :)

> The volunteers can know that the syntax is right by running an
> automated tool that validates and extracts data from the document and
> additional files.  And if it changes we do as you did with the ISO
> dates:  someone proposes the change, tries it out, changes the tools,
> and submits a pull request for the existing dataset.  (But as the
> format will be more geared towards automatic processing, this last
> part should be easier to achieve than it is today.)

Sure :) This is fine if the types are separate from the SRFI HTML. Then
we can freely improve and change them and run a tool to check.

> All my previous statements take into account the workflow I've
> proposed a few emails ago:
> * the author writes the SRFI as he wants (and is accepted by the editor);
> * the editor together with the author finalize the document in the
> "free-form" HTML format;
> * from here on the "volunteers" (or if time permits the editor and/or
> author) would take the HTML, reformat it and augment it as needed, and
> add the signatures;
> * (nothing prevents the author to start with this last form, but it is
> not part of the SRFI requirements / guidelines;)

This process is great.

I've been thinking it would be great to have a web dashboard showing the
conversion status of all SRFIs at a glance. I made a demo of how it
might look (the checkmarks are randomized):

     http://lassi.io/temp/srfi-status-dashboard.html

This kind of visual overview would be a big motivator for me: just keep
working at it until all the rows are green.

The dashboard would be auto-updated by our verification tool running on
some Continuous Integration server :) We could install Git hooks onto
the SRFI GitHub repos to submit all pull requests for checking to CI. I
believe GitHub can even be configured so that merging to the master
branch is not allowed until the checks pass.