Necessary respec changes #126
Conversation
|
next step is rename the repo, then ping me to merge this. |
Yes, that makes absolute sense, but I would need the thumbs up from @deniak to see whether this is really what the process document means by 'history' field. |
|
Awesome, thank you! |
|
I understand the shortname is going from 'vc-jwt' to 'vc-jose-cose'. If so, the commit c6b17ee looks good. |
I do not understand, @deniak. If I look at the preview, which is the pure HTML generated by respec, there is no trace of that "previousDiffURI": "https://www.w3.org/TR/2023/WD-vc-jwt-20230710/"entry to the respec config (which is the only entry I could find that refers to previous short name), the entry is not there either. |
I think there's a bug in respec. There should be a link to the history page in the history section of the headers. This is where the data attribute should appear. |
That is our luck :-) Does it take a long time to get this done in your estimation? (I do not know who maintains respec these days). Alternatively, can you tell us what is what you expect exactly in the header? We can then add that manually and we can move on. (The pubrules' reference does not help either: at the moment, the only "history" reference is the github commit history...) |
|
respec does check if the history link exists before displaying it. I'm not sure why the check is there but that's why your spec is missing the link, because of course, the link with the new shortname doesn't exist yet. What you can do is generating the snapshot from respec and then add the history link manually, e.g. https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-canon/: <dt>History:</dt>
<dd>
<a href="https://www.w3.org/standards/history/vc-jose-cose/" data-previous-shortname="vc-jwt">https://www.w3.org/standards/history/vc-jose-cose/</a>
</dd>
<dd>
<a href="https://github.com/w3c/vc-jose-cose/commits/">Commit history</a>
</dd>Once the link is there, you can upload it on /TR and it should pass pubrules. After the document has been published, the history link should magically appear for future versions as the history link will return a 200. I'll follow up with respec to see if we can fix that use case. |
|
Bug reported: https://github.com/w3c/respec/issues/4486 |
|
Can we merge this PR now? or do we have to wait to resolve the bug? |
No, we should not wait for the bug resolution, #126 (comment) should be done manually. (Which is what you did in a different thread.) So...
Thx |
|
FYI unexpected hiccup: it seems that there is, formally, a need to get an official approval for a short name change. I have submitted this request yesterday but, with vacations and all, it may take more and the official publication may not happen tomorrow (Thursday 20th). The possible changes to change a date are on me. In the meantime, it is important to keep all PR-s open to avoid getting into a versioning mess. Cc @OR13 |
OR13
added
the
blocked-by-w3c-administrative-process
iherman
removed
the
blocked-by-w3c-administrative-process
|
The document has been published: https://www.w3.org/TR/2023/WD-vc-jose-cose-20230720/ After merging this branch, and before merging the other pending PRs:
|
|
done in #129 |
This provides all the changes to respec to change the document's short name.
Merge should happen only once the repository also changes, to avoid respec and subsequent pubrules' checkeer errors.
@deniak I have one question: in #115 (comment) we said that a change should happen manually on the document before the publication step, namely (quoting from the pubrules document):
However, the WD generated by respec does not include and 'history' reference, so I am not sure where I would have to make a change. Please advise, thx.
Preview | Diff