-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 317
Editorial: Revise reference links with bikeshed #1762
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
Open
monica-ch
wants to merge
2
commits into
w3c:main
Choose a base branch
from
monica-ch:SW-Fix-Bikeshed
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would strongly discourage adding references to other specs in the "anchors" block like this. If there are definitions in other specs that you need to reference they should be exported from the other spec, rather than worked around like this (and I think even if they aren't exported, you can still link to them without adding them to anchors by explicitly mentioning the spec).
And the same probably also applies to all the existing html fetch and storage references below.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There are actually four ways to create a link to other specification:
[=something=]
, which might be what you recommend.[=something=](https://example.com)
style link to directly add a link.<a href="https://example.com">something</a>
to directly add a link.How do you use them differently? Or, are there a style guide or so to explain the recommended way? In #1760 (comment), I suggested to modify 3 and 4 to either of 1 or 2. I am quite sure that brought this change.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As https://speced.github.io/bikeshed/#custom-dfns sort of hints at, the "anchors" block exists to link to specs that are not in the autolinking database. If a spec is in the autolinking database (as w3c specs all should be) you should never need to use it. You can use an explicit
<l spec='html'>
indication to link to unexported definitions (although you should probably still work with the target spec to make sure the definition does get exported). Maybe link-defaults also work to explicitly link to an unexported definition. But in either case using anchors to link to specs means for one that you won't get any bikeshed warnings if the destination doesn't exist (or stops to exist), and in general just makes the spec way less maintainable.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I created #1763 to track this work. Thanks for bringing this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for the reply and sorry for the delay, let me dump what I understood:
Let me discuss the next actions in the #1763.