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

Necessary respec changes #126

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 21, 2023
Merged

Necessary respec changes #126

merged 1 commit into from
Jul 21, 2023

Conversation

iherman
Copy link
Member

@iherman iherman commented Jul 13, 2023

This provides all the changes to respec to change the document's short name.

Merge should happen only once the repository also changes, to avoid respec and subsequent pubrules' checkeer errors.

@deniak I have one question: in #115 (comment) we said that a change should happen manually on the document before the publication step, namely (quoting from the pubrules document):

The syntax of a “history” URI must be https://www.w3.org/standards/history/shortname/, and consistent with the shortname mentioned in 'Latest Version'. Note: If there's a shortname change it must be specified using the following data attribute data-previous-shortname='previous-shortname' on the element.

However, the WD generated by respec does not include and 'history' reference, so I am not sure where I would have to make a change. Please advise, thx.


Preview | Diff

@iherman iherman requested a review from OR13 July 13, 2023 10:10
@iherman iherman mentioned this pull request Jul 13, 2023
@OR13
Copy link
Contributor

OR13 commented Jul 13, 2023

next step is rename the repo, then ping me to merge this.

@OR13
Copy link
Contributor

OR13 commented Jul 13, 2023

@iherman this was what I had manually generated previously, for reference... c6b17ee

I ran the spec locally exported it manually, and edited the file.

@iherman
Copy link
Member Author

iherman commented Jul 14, 2023

@iherman this was what I had manually generated previously, for reference... c6b17ee

I ran the spec locally exported it manually, and edited the file.

Yes, that makes absolute sense, but I would need the thumbs up from @deniak to see whether this is really what the process document means by 'history' field.

@iherman
Copy link
Member Author

iherman commented Jul 14, 2023

@OR13 I have renamed the repository. However, before merging, I would like to get an approval from @deniak (which won't happen before Monday; France is on public holiday today).

@iherman iherman requested a review from deniak July 14, 2023 09:58
@OR13
Copy link
Contributor

OR13 commented Jul 14, 2023

Awesome, thank you!

@deniak
Copy link
Member

deniak commented Jul 17, 2023

I understand the shortname is going from 'vc-jwt' to 'vc-jose-cose'. If so, the commit c6b17ee looks good.
Updating the shortname in the respec config should leave the data-previous-shortname attribute to 'vc-jwt' which is required so the system will know there is a shortname change.

@iherman
Copy link
Member Author

iherman commented Jul 17, 2023

I understand the shortname is going from 'vc-jwt' to 'vc-jose-cose'. If so, the commit c6b17ee looks good. Updating the shortname in the respec config should leave the data-previous-shortname attribute to 'vc-jwt' which is required so the system will know there is a shortname change.

I do not understand, @deniak. If I look at the preview, which is the pure HTML generated by respec, there is no trace of that data-previous-shortname attribute. I have also tried to add the

"previousDiffURI": "https://www.w3.org/TR/2023/WD-vc-jwt-20230710/"

entry to the respec config (which is the only entry I could find that refers to previous short name), the entry is not there either.

@deniak
Copy link
Member

deniak commented Jul 17, 2023

I do not understand, @deniak. If I look at the preview, which is the pure HTML generated by respec, there is no trace of that data-previous-shortname attribute.

I think there's a bug in respec. There should be a link to the history page in the history section of the headers. This is where the data attribute should appear.

@iherman
Copy link
Member Author

iherman commented Jul 17, 2023

I do not understand, @deniak. If I look at the preview, which is the pure HTML generated by respec, there is no trace of that data-previous-shortname attribute.

I think there's a bug in respec. There should be a link to the history page in the history section of the headers. This is where the data attribute should appear.

That is our luck :-) Does it take a long time to get this done in your estimation? (I do not know who maintains respec these days). Alternatively, can you tell us what is what you expect exactly in the header? We can then add that manually and we can move on.

(The pubrules' reference does not help either: at the moment, the only "history" reference is the github commit history...)

@deniak
Copy link
Member

deniak commented Jul 17, 2023

respec does check if the history link exists before displaying it. I'm not sure why the check is there but that's why your spec is missing the link, because of course, the link with the new shortname doesn't exist yet.

What you can do is generating the snapshot from respec and then add the history link manually, e.g. https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-canon/:

<dt>History:</dt>
<dd>
    <a href="https://www.w3.org/standards/history/vc-jose-cose/" data-previous-shortname="vc-jwt">https://www.w3.org/standards/history/vc-jose-cose/</a>
</dd>
<dd>
    <a href="https://github.com/w3c/vc-jose-cose/commits/">Commit history</a>
</dd>

Once the link is there, you can upload it on /TR and it should pass pubrules.

After the document has been published, the history link should magically appear for future versions as the history link will return a 200.

I'll follow up with respec to see if we can fix that use case.

@deniak
Copy link
Member

deniak commented Jul 17, 2023

@OR13
Copy link
Contributor

OR13 commented Jul 17, 2023

Can we merge this PR now? or do we have to wait to resolve the bug?

@iherman
Copy link
Member Author

iherman commented Jul 17, 2023

Can we merge this PR now? or do we have to wait to resolve the bug?

No, we should not wait for the bug resolution, #126 (comment) should be done manually. (Which is what you did in a different thread.)

So...

  • I think the PR can be merged
  • You should generate the final version with the additional thingy in Necessary respec changes #126 (comment) and put it somewhere where I can pick it up from
  • Run the result through pubrules' checker, just to be on the safe side
  • I will pick it up tomorrow morning, and do the necessary admin to get this done (publish it on /TR manually, and get the admin with the webmaster)

Thx

@iherman
Copy link
Member Author

iherman commented Jul 19, 2023

FYI unexpected hiccup: it seems that there is, formally, a need to get an official approval for a short name change. I have submitted this request yesterday but, with vacations and all, it may take more and the official publication may not happen tomorrow (Thursday 20th).

The possible changes to change a date are on me. In the meantime, it is important to keep all PR-s open to avoid getting into a versioning mess.

Cc @OR13

@OR13 OR13 added the blocked-by-w3c-administrative-process Awaiting action from W3C Staff label Jul 19, 2023
@iherman iherman removed the blocked-by-w3c-administrative-process Awaiting action from W3C Staff label Jul 21, 2023
@iherman
Copy link
Member Author

iherman commented Jul 21, 2023

The document has been published: https://www.w3.org/TR/2023/WD-vc-jose-cose-20230720/

After merging this branch, and before merging the other pending PRs:

@OR13 OR13 merged commit 8622d16 into main Jul 21, 2023
@OR13
Copy link
Contributor

OR13 commented Jul 21, 2023

done in #129

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants