Omit unnecessary elements in the dev edition

[domenic]

Omits the small TOC, fingerprint markers, and <pre class=idl> blocks.

Part of #27.

[domenic]

Right now CSS is still hiding the TOC elements below level 2; that's probably fixable too...

[zcorpan]

Do web developers really not want to see IDL blocks?

It seems to me there would be weird stuff surrounding the missing IDL blocks; those should be handled with w-nodev if we actually want to hide them, instead of just yanking the pre element, I think.

[domenic]

IDL blocks are certainly omitted in developers.whatwg.org. I think they do not; they are pretty meaningless, using terms like interface, attribute, readonly, [CEReactions], etc. which are very unhelpful for developers. Instead developers are meant to get an idea of the API from the domintro boxes.

The main IDL blocks that get hidden by this are the ones in the element intro boxes. Most others are already hidden with w-nodev.

[zcorpan]

OK. So maybe we should instead add w-nodev to the dt/dd in the element boxes? Having a stray "DOM interface:" and then nothing or sometimes "Uses HTMLElement" is weird.

Possibly the element boxes in dev edition should say "DOM interface: Uses HTMLPictureElement" instead of the full IDL block?

[zcorpan]

Upon closer inspection, I think it's in many cases OK to remove IDL blocks, so this change is OK. But there are some tweaks we should do to source here and there. I can take a stab at that.

[sideshowbarker]

Given the main point of the developer edition as far as its content goes is to reduce the amount of information that developers have to wade through that’s not essential to their information needs, I agree it makes sense to omit the IDL. Developers who want to the see the IDL can always read the full spec.