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

Minor cleanup items #91

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 23, 2024
Merged

Minor cleanup items #91

merged 1 commit into from
Mar 23, 2024

Conversation

getorymckeag
Copy link
Contributor

Contributes to #82
Closes #4

My #4 issue is pretty old, and this is about the only thing I saw as I dug through forecasts- it is possible to have a name type without an authority, and in many cases it can be too much. Otherwise, I think we look good.

I also removed the recommendation for URIs in the IDs. I don't think it's appropriate here. First of all, I'm not sure I agree with it, but even before we get there I think we've crossing our opinions into modeling, which we've agreed is a slippery slope into a larger project.

@caindy caindy merged commit 97f23a0 into 1.0.0-wip Mar 23, 2024
3 checks passed
@caindy caindy deleted the required-fields-audit branch March 23, 2024 22:51
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.

Audit "required" fields across the spec
2 participants