Dark mode, CSS and presentation simplifications

[Tpt]

• Remove class="box", the code already has a different background color
• Drop the style block that is unused

---

Preview | Diff

[afs]

Definition box has gone.
Borders on boxes have gone - background contrast is light mode is minimal.

[Tpt]

Thank you for the reviews!

Definition box has gone.

Indeed, I wanted to be consistent with specs like RDF concets that do not use boxes. It's something that might be nice to harmonize.

Borders on boxes have gone - background contrast is light mode is minimal.

I guess you think about code boxes? If yes, we should maybe discuss it there w3c/sparql-results-json#47 (comment)

[afs]

Definition box has gone.

Indeed, I wanted to be consistent with specs like RDF concepts that do not use boxes. It's something that might be nice to harmonize.

One style across SPARQL documents would be great but to convert to be like RDF Concepts is another step and looks like a major change. It is not just about styling but the way the content is written.

SPARQL Query has many definition boxes. While it look possible to use reSpec features, the conversion to a more inline style of writing as is used in RDF Concepts is rewording many of the definitions. I don't think that such a change is helpful to the audience - makes it look like there has been major change when their hasn't been (aside from the possibility of introducing mistakes 🙈 ).

[Tpt]

SPARQL Query has many definition boxes.

Indeed, I agree changing SPARQL Query definitions is not a great idea. But here we got only a single definition that might not even be very useful (e.g. SPARQL JSON results has no definition). Happy to revert back to a box if you feel so.

[afs]

SPARQL Query has many definition boxes.

Indeed, I agree changing SPARQL Query definitions is not a great idea. But here we got only a single definition that might not even be very useful (e.g. SPARQL JSON results has no definition). Happy to revert back to a box if you feel so.

In this doc, the section itself is called "Definition" (it can define because there are XML schemas.)

I think it is for important for SPARQL docs to be consistent amongst themselves.

There are different requirements - SPARQL query has kinds of examples boxes (results, query, etc) that are current colored differently. RDF Concepts does not have to deal with that and I'm not sure if reSpec has a simple way to do it (haven't dug int the CSS enough - maybe it can).

[Tpt]

There are different requirements - SPARQL query has kinds of examples boxes (results, query, etc) that are current colored differently. RDF Concepts does not have to deal with that and I'm not sure if reSpec has a simple way to do it (haven't dug int the CSS enough - maybe it can).

Make sense! I have added back the definition box using the class=def from the default W3C stylesheet https://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/2021/README.html#def Does it works for you?