Open aschrijver opened 6 years ago
Will you make a concrete PR that adds the clarity you think would be better?
Yes, I could, however:
Pull requests will be accepted only if the submitter is a current member of the W3C Social WG but issues can be opened by anyone.
And I am not a member.
The WG has wound down since a few months ago so I don't think you should pay attention to that.
On Thu, Sep 13, 2018, 10:17 AM Arnold Schrijver notifications@github.com wrote:
Yes, I could, however:
Pull requests will be accepted only if the submitter is a current member of the W3C Social WG but issues can be opened by anyone.
And I am not a member.
— You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams/issues/486#issuecomment-420940443, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAKfBtYeZ5Dsl7igUPr24KuMh94TFsekks5uaiKRgaJpZM4VCenP .
Thanks. I made the changes (also reordered properties on Object
definition to be alphabetically.
Based on this suggestion, in issue triage, we reviewed all the properties with domain Link
in the vocabulary document. nameMap
, preview
, and attributedTo
were all left out. To resolve this, I created an erratum for section 4.2 of core that gives the full list of properties for a Link
, except href
which is specified earlier in the paragraph.
The PR is here: https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams/pull/553
I'll try to get this included. We have a lot of ERRATA backed up!
Please Indicate One:
Please Describe the Issue in https://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-core:
Link#name:
nameMap
, in the section describing Link (par. 4.2), there is only mention ofname
, while the definition ofname
in Vocabulary states thatnameMap
property is valid for Links as well. Should mention that in core spec too, for clarity.As an editorial issue, it would be better to explicitly mention this in the document, IMHO.