Update to syntax breakdown plus editorial improvements

ietf-wg-jsonpath / draft-ietf-jsonpath-base

Development of a JSONPath internet draft

https://ietf-wg-jsonpath.github.io/draft-ietf-jsonpath-base/

Other

59 stars 20 forks source link

Update to syntax breakdown plus editorial improvements #263

Closed glyn closed 1 year ago

glyn commented 1 year ago

This is a revised version of https://github.com/ietf-wg-jsonpath/draft-ietf-jsonpath-base/pull/258 which fixes the editorial issues identified in https://github.com/ietf-wg-jsonpath/draft-ietf-jsonpath-base/pull/262.

Reviewers may find the rendered version helpful.

TODO:

[x] Agree a concrete term for APPENDER and replace the placeholder throughout.
[x] Fix the warnings/errors from make.

Fixes https://github.com/ietf-wg-jsonpath/draft-ietf-jsonpath-base/issues/201 Fixes https://github.com/ietf-wg-jsonpath/draft-ietf-jsonpath-base/issues/255.

glyn commented 1 year ago

I recognize that this extends #258, but that content still needs to be reviewed by the others on it's own.

Why does #258 need reviewing on its own? Wouldn't it be more efficient for them to review the current PR in which some editorial rough edges have been polished away?

glyn commented 1 year ago

@gregsdennis On the basis of your statement that you don't care about the language so long as the architecture of PR #258 is preserved (which the current PR does preserve), please would you approve this PR?

glyn commented 1 year ago

@cabo I note that merging is currently blocked by @gregsdennis's comment about his desire for PR #258 to be reviewed separately. Since this separate review isn't going to happen and Greg hasn't responded to my question or request, I'm planning on merging anyway. So that I am not accused of acting unilaterally, please could you, @timbray , or @goessner give me a thumbs up if you agree with this course of action.