Initial update for draft-08 / handrews-*-02 #569
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This updates the various numberings to avoid confusion between the work-in-progress drafts and the published draft-07 and draft-handrews-*-01 documents.
dlax
approved these changes
Mar 16, 2018
gregsdennis
added
clarification
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This updates the various numberings to avoid confusion between
the work-in-progress drafts and the published draft-07 and
draft-handrews-*-01 documents.
Having examples using new keywords but referencing draft-07
is confusing, as is having meta-schemas identified as draft-07
with keywords that are not part of draft-07. Similarly, having
a set of draft-handrews-*-01 documents that are buildable
that do not match the published ones is confusing.
Last time I did some "-wip" suffixes but I'm not sure how
clear this was to anyone else, and the main result was that
I accidentally left about half of them in at publication :-(
This seems more straightforward.