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
cleanup of index.html #111
Conversation
* normalized whitespace * fixed various typos * fixed nested lists * fixed incorrect h2/h3/h4 levels
* fixed broken `img` markup
There are also a number of |
Conflicts resolved; should be mergeable. |
This looks like it makes only changes to the internal organization of the html, but no substantive changes to the text. Is that correct? |
@ken-ebert - Yes, "changes to the internal organization of the html, but no substantive changes to the text" is the intent. |
@TallTed You did a huge amount of work to make this all consistent. Do I need to review the changes in my recently merged PR#105 regarding device use cases to perform a similar cleanup? |
same cleanup applied to text from #105
@ken-ebert -- Thanks for noticing I'd overlooked that! Handled. |
fixed Carol/Certifications Testing Lab and Vince/VAR Resellers details
Also changed details about update application, removing reference there to Vince. |
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.
It looks good to me.
You Gus are awesome! Reviewing now |
Something huge got merged, with lots of whitespace changes, and lots of |
that was me -- I added tags for glossary terms across the doc. I was planning (expecting) to be the one to fix it w/ your PR. how can I help? |
@stonematt - Regrettably, the best way to handle this would have been to merge #111 before the across-the-board glossary tagging -- or to take the same steps to apply the same tags to #111 before trying to merge it. I don't think reverting commits will be optimal at this point. GitHub's tools don't offer a good way to address the current state of things. External editors (with a bit more hoop-jumping) can allow for side-by-side comparisons of any two versions, and can do a better job of flagging differences at the character level (such as the I'll take a crack at this (putting #111 against #115 in BBEdit) today, and make my comments on #115. Please don't close #111 until #115 is finalized and merged. |
I can't win... I just did a huge cross-compare between #115 and #111, and made #111 almost completely fixed by pasting a unified set of changes here. But there are still a LOT of conflicts with the upstream. Also --
|
index.html
Outdated
describes a quality or qualities, property or properties of an <a>entity</a> | ||
which establish its existence and uniqueness. The use cases outlined here are | ||
provided in order to make progress toward possible future standardization and | ||
interoperability of both low and high-stakes <a>claims</a> with the goals of |
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.
"low" to "low-"
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.
This is an editorial nit.
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.
All of the new changes look good to me.
After looking at the document after merge, I noticed that Figure 2 Verifiable Credentials, Example Domains for User Needs seems to be duplicative of Figure 3 Verifiable Credentials, Example Domains for User Needs. I think that Figure 2 should be deleted. |
"EXAMPLE 3: Amanda's passport" -> EXAMPLE 3: Anand's passport" |
Preview | Diff