Preliminary rules for discussion #34
Conversation
|
TODO: format examples |
|
Thanks for taking a lead in this document @ioggstream. |
|
The |
|
Thanks Gregg. I need to learn how to "re-spec", but I think we can focus on the ideas for now :) |
ioggstream
force-pushed
the
ioggstream-8
branch
2 times, most recently
from
5a41dd8 to
d07cd81
Compare
spec/index.html
Outdated
| * it supports different encodings, including UTF-8, UTF-16 and UTF-32; | ||
| * it supports more data types than JSON; | ||
| * the structure of its documents, that is named YAML representation graph, | ||
| is a tree that can have cycles. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If it has cycles, then it is not a tree.
I think the correct notion here is that of rooted graph
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@pchampin replaced. Could you PTAL and check if there are other incorrect terms, please? Thx++ R.
spec/index.html
Outdated
| @@ -421,6 +569,91 @@ <h2>Fragment identifiers</h2> | |||
| <h3>Examples</h3> | |||
| <p class="ednote">FIXME</p> | |||
| </section> | |||
| <section id="faq" class="informative" data-format="markdown"> | |||
| **NOTE** REMOVE THIS SECTION BEFORE PUBLICATION. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why should we remove it? Anything that documents the decisions made in the spec can be useful for future readers. Granted, it is not the same thing to write these FAQs for internal purpose, and to write them for future readers (the 2nd requires more work), so we may decide to remove some of them if that extra-work is deemed unnecessary. But in general, such an FAQ could be kept in the final document, IMO.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Perhaps we can figure out some markup to add “rationale” notes, ideally with links to issues that record resolutions, either inline, or in an appendix.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@pchampin I suggest to try to put everything that is relevant in the spec.
FAQ are useful during the editing process for people that want to comment. Once a document is released,
I think that most of the FAQ can just fit a blog post on the WG repository.
In general, most of the rationale will be on the repository, and we probably shouldn't stuff all the issue discussion inside the spec.
Filed #40 |
ioggstream
changed the title
|
@gkellogg all set. Feel free to merge, now. |
* Basic concepts and Core requirements * MUST UTF-8 * comments are white spaces * anchored nodes are considered static * FAQ Co-authored-by: Gregg Kellogg <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]>
|
Rebased. |
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Gregg Kellogg <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Gregg Kellogg <[email protected]>
| named anchors and so on. | ||
| </p> | ||
| <p> | ||
| A YAML-LD document is a [[YAML]] document |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For consistency with earlier content, there should be no "YAML document", but I wonder whether that means that there should also be no YAML-LD document -- i.e., whether YAML-LD must be streams just like YAML itself.
| A YAML-LD document is a [[YAML]] document | |
| A YAML-LD document is [[YAML]] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm leaving this suggestion unmerged based on @ioggstream's comments on today's meeting. It can be re-added as an issue or PR if it is inconsistent.
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]>
|
This PR was discussed in the 2022-07-06 meeting, and it was agreed to merge. |
This PR
Preview | Diff