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

Remove restriction on authority property value #2233

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 8, 2022

Conversation

mattgarrish
Copy link
Member

@mattgarrish mattgarrish commented Apr 6, 2022

For consideration as a way of closing #2200.

Removes the restrictions on the value of the authority property and copies and modifies the note we used for the old dc:type registry.

Fixes #2200


Preview | Diff

@iherman
Copy link
Member

iherman commented Apr 8, 2022

The issue was discussed in a meeting on 2022-04-08

List of resolutions:

  • Resolution No. 3: Do a final update of the IDPF registry, add note that it will no longer be updated, accept PR 2233, close issue 2200.
View the transcript

3. Section D.3.2 Review (issue epub-specs#2200)

See github issue epub-specs#2200.

See github pull request epub-specs#2233.

Matt Garrish: this was basically a mini-registry that IDPF was making, we said you can use certain limited token values unless you provide a URL.
… there was a request to add to this mini-registry, but my preference is rather to drop restrictions on registry values.
… add note that we are no longer maintaining this.

Ivan Herman: in addition, mgarrish and I went through a number of older IDPF documents.
… Bill_Kasdorf noted that that there are a number of IDPF documents linked to older versions of spec.
… so I updated these links.
… in doing this we found the mini-registry, which is what this issue is about.
… so the proposal is that we use the same IDPF registries that were there before.
… in the meantime, we've gone through the registry values and updated links.
… we've reached out to various wg members, from JP, DE, etc. to ask for clarification on which links would be proper to use.
… zheng_xu_ if you can please help interpret the link to the chinese website, to see if it is the correct one.
… I wonder if there are other IDPF documents that need updating in the same way, but I'm not sure what those would be.

Matt Garrish: main ones are the vocabs, the CMT, so I think we got most of them.

Murata Makoto: do we need to finalize those changes to the IDPF registry today?

Ivan Herman: not right now at this meeting, but I'd like to have all of these changes behind us by next week.
… if you could look at the pointer that Koike-san provided by then, that would help.

Murata Makoto: are there EN versions of the data linked via these links?

Ivan Herman: I'm not sure, but these documents only need to be in their native languages.

Shinya Takami (高見真也): the first link from Koike-san's comment is good for these needs.
… the second one is more an introduction from the committee in charge, so it may not be correct for this use.

Ivan Herman: okay, I will wait until next week before finalizing any changes to the IDPF registry.

Murata Makoto: I will make my comments in the issue.

Ivan Herman: okay, thank you.

Matt Garrish: noting that there is a PR to resolve this.

Proposed resolution: Do a final update of the IDPF registry, add note that it will no longer be updated, accept PR 2233, close issue 2200. (Wendy Reid)

Wendy Reid: +1.

Matt Garrish: +1.

Matthew Chan: +1.

Ivan Herman: +1.

Charles LaPierre: +1.

GeorgeK: +1.

Murata Makoto: +1.

Dan Lazin: +1.

Dave Cramer: +hbg:1.

Bill Kasdorf: +1.

Ben Schroeter: +1.

Masakazu Kitahara: +1.

Resolution #3: Do a final update of the IDPF registry, add note that it will no longer be updated, accept PR 2233, close issue 2200.

@iherman iherman mentioned this pull request Apr 8, 2022
@mattgarrish mattgarrish merged commit 624670a into main Apr 8, 2022
@mattgarrish mattgarrish deleted the editorial/issue-2200 branch April 8, 2022 16:37
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.

Section D.3.2 Review
2 participants