Tracking item for minor adjustments to design and errata during spec authoring

[michaelcfanning]

Microsoft proposals the following incidental adjustments for clarity/consistency post TC33:

• [x] In #341, we made the following additional changes for consistency in the removal of "instance" (see this comment for the full set of changes):

  • [x] Rename runAutomationDetails.instanceId to runAutomationDetails.id,.
  • [x] Rename run.id (of type runAutomationDetails) to run.automationDetails. Otherwise we'd end up with run.id.id, where the first id is a runAutomationDetails object and the second is a GUID-valued string. With this change, we end up with run.automationDetails.id, which reads naturally.

• [x] Per @kupsch: Modify date-time format to allow a date without a time.

• [x] In #309 we made several more property and object name changes for consistency with "artifact". See this comment for the full set of changes.

• [x] In #319, we created a multiformatMessageString object and converted some reportingDescriptor properties to this type (fullDescription and shortDescription). We neglected to convert reportingDescriptor.help to this type, however.

[ghost]

The following errata were noted during the ballot period and will be corrected after the ballot closes:

• [x] Per @kupsch: In #291, in the JSON example there are a couple of errors in the SARIF data:

  • results/0/locations/0/fullQualifiedLogicalName should be "/orders/0/productIds/1"
  • results/0/locations/0/logicalLocationIndex should be 3
  • results/1/locations/0/logicalLocationIndex should be 4

• [x] Per @kupsch: In #291, in the examples, clarify that the line numbers are not part of the JSON.

  Jim: I will do that by mentioning the convention in §2.2, "Format examples", and by italicizing the line numbers (not by coloring them, for accessibility reasons, although of course I could both italicize and color them).

• [x] Per @kupsch: In #321, in 3.10.3, the sentence describing the sarif sheme ("Such a URI..."), would be more specific as:

  Such a URI uses the sarif scheme. The sarif URI scheme consists of only a scheme (with the value sarif) and a path component. The path component is interpreted as a JSON pointer [RFC6901] into the SARIF document containing the URI. The authority, query and fragment URI components are forbidden.

[ghost]

@kupsch I made the changes you suggested. See §2.2 (Format examples), §3.10.3 (URIs that use the SARIF scheme), and §3.31.8 (logicalLocation kind property).

@michaelcfanning All items are address so I'm resolving/closing this issue.