-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 169
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
Remove duplicate entity definitions in specification text #612
Comments
Was thinking I could do some of that. Just to be sure: any mention of any of the entities from the appendix should have a hyperlink? But only if it is "on its own" and not in an example of a "path". For example: Add a hyperlink to
But obviously not
|
I wish we could render code snippets with hyperlinks, but I don't think it's possible in Markdown (it was something I looked into for #610). In addition to the linking, there are actual definitions that could be eliminated or reduced, such as this one in MEG:
I don't know what the updated text should be, but since the description in the text is a complete duplicate of the definition of the entity, it would be great to reduce it. I think the main text should provide some section-specific context, rather than fully defining the entity. Plus, duplications in the text will make it harder to update entity definitions, since we'll have multiple places we have to change. |
Here is a gist that may make it possible to add hyperlinks to code blocks: https://gist.github.com/jesstelford/cb4dd6fafc18221ce27250e84fd19327 |
probably needs another pass to see how many duplicates are left |
In #568 we created a new appendix with the entity definitions. Whenever the entities are referenced in the text, a hyperlink is used to point to the appropriate section of the appendix. The appendix definitions should be considered the "canonical" definitions for these entities, with text in the rest of the specification used only to provide modality-specific context and examples. We did not, however, edit the specification text much in #568, so there are a lot of duplicate definitions and elaborations that could be removed or at least cut down.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: