Closed iherman closed 3 years ago
See
<a href="https://w3.org/TR/did-core#representations">DID Core: Representations</a>
I say this as the person that made the mistake above -- we should be using the data-cite
mechanism for this in terms.html
See
<a href="https://w3.org/TR/did-core#representations">DID Core: Representations</a>
I say this as the person that made the mistake above -- we should be using the
data-cite
mechanism for this in terms.html
Ok :-) I am happy to commit a change with this to complete the PR... unless @jandrieu or @philarcher shout at me. So I will wait a bit...
We've pulled the dynamic link to the terms doc from the use case doc because it kept breaking, so I don't think we have any objection.
We've pulled the dynamic link to the terms doc from the use case doc because it kept breaking, so I don't think we have any objection.
Thanks @jandrieu. @msporny I added a commit taking care of that, too. The PR is all yours:-)
Editorial, multiple reviews, no objections, merging.
Most changes are purely editorial. Except two things:
(1) I have changed a cross reference in the terminology description for DID Methods. Please check whether that is all right
(2) I have found an oddity in the description of representation. There is a cross reference which says "DID Core: Representations."; its HTML source code is:
although in all other places the internal, respec-like reference is used, e.g., this should look like
However, I did not changed this (yet) because, afaik, this separate
term.html
file is (was?) also used by the UCR document and I did not want to create a problem. @jandrieu @philarcher would there be a problem if I changed that?Preview | Diff