search

w3c / json-ld-syntax

JSON-LD 1.1 Specification
https://w3c.github.io/json-ld-syntax/
Other
111 stars 22 forks source link

typo fixes #352

Closed steltenpower closed 4 years ago

steltenpower commented 4 years ago

Preview | Diff

gkellogg commented 4 years ago

@iherman didn't these checks look to see if the submitter was in the organization, or allow it to be overridden? That seems to be missing from checks now. Certainly, there shouldn't be any issue with this PR, but it's curious that it's not doing that check anymore.

iherman commented 4 years ago

@gkellogg you are right, I will ask...

plehegar commented 4 years ago

there is a glitch on GH side apparently. Our repo-manager got properly invoked and has https://labs.w3.org/repo-manager/pr/id/w3c/json-ld-syntax/352 . @dontcallmedom is following up.

iherman commented 4 years ago

@gkellogg all the changes are really spelling errors; they can be incorporated into the final Rec. Meaning that it may not be necessary to store them as Errata for the errata management.

gkellogg commented 4 years ago

@gkellogg all the changes are really spelling errors; they can be incorporated into the final Rec. Meaning that it may not be necessary to store them as Errata for the errata management.

Yes, but I thought it would be a good test of the errata system. As I understand it, this should now show up in https://w3c.github.com/json-ld-syntax/errata, although I don't see it there.

Once merged, we can remove the labels, as it would no longer need to be listed.

iherman commented 4 years ago

Yes, but I thought it would be a good test of the errata system. As I understand it, this should now show up in https://w3c.github.com/json-ld-syntax/errata, although I don't see it there.

Nop. The errata list only includes "accepted" errata, meaning that the label is set to "Errata". "ErratumRaised" does not mean it is an accepted erratum.