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

Add documentation for Markdown headings used in spec generation #867

Open
wants to merge 12 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

bact
Copy link
Collaborator

@bact bact commented Aug 28, 2024

Add a documentation about headings and formatting used in Markdown files for the specification generation.

This will allow contributors to better familiarise with the format that is expected from the spec-parser.

If there is an update in the spec-parser, this document should be updated as well.

Information about specific formatting to support localization can be added in the future.

Signed-off-by: Arthit Suriyawongkul <[email protected]>
@bact bact added the documentation Improvements or additions to documentation label Aug 28, 2024
@bact bact added this to the 3.1 milestone Aug 28, 2024
@bact bact self-assigned this Aug 28, 2024
@bact
Copy link
Collaborator Author

bact commented Sep 4, 2024

@zvr @goneall does this document best to be inside this spdx-3-model repo or in the spec-parser repo?

I can open new PR in spec-parser if it is more preferred (and close this one here).

Signed-off-by: Arthit Suriyawongkul <[email protected]>
@bact bact changed the title Add Markdown for SPDX spec generation documentation Add documentation for Markdown headings used in spec generation Sep 7, 2024
Signed-off-by: Arthit Suriyawongkul <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Arthit Suriyawongkul <[email protected]>
Copy link
Member

@goneall goneall left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good catch @bact

Copy link
Member

@zvr zvr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I am not sure if we want to spend time trying to define everything.

We definitely need to also address multi-lingual content (maybe not right now, but in the future).

specmark.md Show resolved Hide resolved
specmark.md Show resolved Hide resolved
Signed-off-by: Arthit Suriyawongkul <[email protected]>
@bact bact requested review from zvr and kestewart September 8, 2024 00:32
@goneall
Copy link
Member

goneall commented Sep 24, 2024

@zvr - Are you OK with merging this? From the tech call, we felt there was value in documenting this for those doing localization / internationalization for the model.

Copy link
Contributor

@kestewart kestewart left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not sure we should leave a "Blah" in the text, but rest looks fine.

specmark.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Signed-off-by: Arthit Suriyawongkul <[email protected]>
@bact bact requested a review from kestewart October 19, 2024 13:45
@zvr
Copy link
Member

zvr commented Oct 21, 2024

I'll review it in detail later this week, but it would be nice to define what our (long-term?) goal will be, @kestewart @goneall .

If we are to produce another PDF version, then my suggestion would be to limit the markdown that can be used, since currently I need to manually change some stuff to produce the PDF. If, on the other hand, we only care about the website (HTML version), then it's perfectly fine to leave "allow everything", as long as it renders fine.

From a quick look, we could add info on:

  • links (all have to have text, no bare URLs)
  • standardized formats (we have for RFCs, I don't remember whether there is already anything else)
  • other languages sections

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants