Fix rendering of examples #237
Conversation
decentralgabe
requested review from
David-Chadwick,
selfissued and
brentzundel
|
Purely an example rendering changing, have editorial approval, merging. |
| @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@ | |||
| # Verifiable Credential Service Worker Plugin for ReSpec | |||
|
|
|||
| But with support for v2, and no JSON-LD processing. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What does this "but" compare with?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is not a good sentence —
https://github.com/w3c/respec-vc but with support for v2, and no JSON-LD processing.
Neither is this —
Verifiable Credential Service Worker Plugin for ReSpec but with support for v2, and no JSON-LD processing.
Nor this —
Verifiable Credentials for ReSpec but with support for v2, and no JSON-LD processing.
Nor this —
Verifiable Credential extensions to ReSpec but with support for v2, and no JSON-LD processing.
Please provide some rephrasing, I guess through a new PR since this one was rushed through.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
After cycling this through my brain a few more times, I think what the above was trying to say is —
# Verifiable Credential Service Worker Plugin for ReSpec
The
**[Verifiable Credential Service Worker Plugin for ReSpec](https://github.com/w3c/vc-jose-cose/tree/main/plugin)**
is basically the **[Verifiable Credential extensions to ReSpec](https://github.com/w3c/respec-vc)**,
but with support for VCDM v2, and without JSON-LD processing.
| # Usage | ||
|
|
||
| To use this extension, add the `respec-plugins` directory to your spec, | ||
| then configure respect to use the worker to post process like so: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| then configure respect to use the worker to post process like so: | |
| then configure ReSpec to use the worker to post-process like so: |
|
|
||
| ```html | ||
| <head> | ||
| <title>Respec Service Worker Plugin Test</title> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| <title>Respec Service Worker Plugin Test</title> | |
| <title>ReSpec Service Worker Plugin Test</title> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
thanks @TallTed similar to my response to David, I will incorporate your changes in a follow-up PR.
|
As a matter of procedure, I think it was a bit rushed to merge this. The PR was issued on Friday evening, I was asked to review it but it was merged on Saturday before I had time to review on Monday morning. |
|
@David-Chadwick since the changes were purely related to examples and had editorial approval (and these changes are blocking multiple PRs) I opted to merge. I appreciate and welcome your feedback, and am willing to incorporate it in follow-up changes. I have taken a note on renaming |
Have re-worked @OR13's plugin to get rid of the service worker approach and loading of local resources; switched to using a CDN which fixes the build issue.
There are further improvements to be made, but at least this will make published versions (on w3.org) consistent with w3c.github.io versions.
Preview | Diff