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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

fix #633, in a better way #639

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

fix #633, in a better way #639

wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

pchampin
Copy link
Contributor

@pchampin pchampin commented Feb 28, 2025 •
edited by pr-preview bot
Loading

and using the markup for candidate corrections

This PR deprecates the old PR #637 because

  • the old PR did not use candidate correction markup
  • the old PR accidentally removed a part of the algorithm that should stay (that's what you get for writing PRs at 1am...)
  • the old PR introduced a behavior change in the edge case where default language was undefined, but default base direction was, on the assumption that the old behavior was a bug. On second thought, I'd rather keep this for a separate issue if this is really a bug (if it is, it might also affect other algorithms, e.g. compaction).
  • the changes in this PR are simpler, while achieving the same result

Preview | Diff

@pchampin
fix #633, in a better way
3b16ca1 
and using the markup for candidate corrections
@pchampin pchampin mentioned this pull request Feb 28, 2025
Closed
@pchampin
fix validation error
bdde251 
<li> elements can not be wrapped by <del> (or <ins>)
so I had to keep the element in place, with some placeholder text explaining that this step is gone.
The idea is to remove it entirely when the candidate correction is accepted.
@pchampin pchampin added the class-2 Class-2 change label Feb 28, 2025
gkellogg
gkellogg approved these changes Mar 1, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@gkellogg gkellogg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We may want to add a reference to step 3.16 so that the ins/del isn't lost to the viewer.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@gkellogg gkellogg gkellogg approved these changes

@dlongley dlongley Awaiting requested review from dlongley

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
class-2 Class-2 change
Projects
JSON-LD Management
Status: Discuss-Call
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@pchampin @gkellogg