Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Added the context references to the vocabulary.yml file #192

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Dec 8, 2024

Conversation

iherman
Copy link
Member

@iherman iherman commented Dec 2, 2024

This means that the references to the relevant context files will appear for each term. (See the di vocabulary description as a reference to what this means).

Copy link
Member

@msporny msporny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM.

@iherman, as an aside, I had to remove the context definition because it was breaking the build. The JSON Schema was failing because of the context declarations, but only when using the versions of node used by the Github Action (Node 18, IIRC). In any case, just letting you know since it breaks the spec build (by failing to generate the vocabulary.(html|ttl|jsonld) files).

@msporny msporny added editorial CR1 This item was processed during the first Candidate Recommendation phase. labels Dec 2, 2024
@iherman
Copy link
Member Author

iherman commented Dec 3, 2024

@iherman, as an aside, I had to remove the context definition because it was breaking the build. The JSON Schema was failing because of the context declarations, but only when using the versions of node used by the Github Action (Node 18, IIRC).

I do not understand that. I use, on my local machine, node version 22.7; the DI repository, in its gh-pages action uses version 16, I do not see any reason why it would not work on version 18.

The version of yml2vocab is the same on my machine as on npm. As for the schema, I have checked the schema file itself on the repository: Line 164 refers to the possibility of a context, referring to a schema definition at line 329.

It looks as if the action did not copy the right JSON schema file. No idea why, but GitHub actions are always a mystery to me...

@msporny
Copy link
Member

msporny commented Dec 8, 2024

Editorial, multiple reviews, no changes requested, no objections, merging.

@msporny msporny merged commit 7b68770 into main Dec 8, 2024
2 checks passed
@msporny msporny deleted the adding-context-references-to-vocabulary-file branch December 8, 2024 20:25
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
CR1 This item was processed during the first Candidate Recommendation phase. editorial
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants