Skip to content

Updated vocabulary and diagram #189

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

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Sep 18, 2023
Merged

Updated vocabulary and diagram #189

merged 2 commits into from
Sep 18, 2023

Conversation

iherman
Copy link
Member

@iherman iherman commented Sep 8, 2023

Now that the DI spec itself is ready for CR, this PR syncs up the vocabulary, including the diagram, with the spec. The changes are:

  • The vocabulary (and the diagram) includes the digestMultibase term, with the caveat in the spec (whereby the term is at risk, and may change for digestSRI) copied into the vocabulary as well. Note that this is the only hard, content change in the vocabulary.
  • The diagram changes discussed in Apply diagram changes #175 are now moved to the “real” branch
  • There is now an alt text for the diagram

As usual, there is a preview of the results

<p>
The left side of the Proof Section contains another ellipse,
styled as Class and labeled as "ProofGraph", and connected
to the ellipse labeled as "Proof" with a connecting line styled as Contains.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

styled as Contains makes me think the key should be changed from Graph Containment, which change I was going to suggest anyway.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@TallTed I agree, but I would prefer to move that into a separate issue. The reason is that, for consistency's sake, this change should also be done in the VCDM, both in the descriptions and on the diagrams, and I do not want to mess up this PR for that. Would you agree? If so, can you put that into a separate issue? Thx.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]>
@msporny
Copy link
Member

msporny commented Sep 18, 2023

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

@msporny msporny merged commit 2a09e8d into main Sep 18, 2023
@msporny msporny deleted the vocab/finalize-vocabulary branch September 18, 2023 14:57
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.

4 participants