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

Replace internal links between ICM documents with relative links to stay within the same release tree / fork / release package #187

Closed
hdamker opened this issue Jul 31, 2024 · 5 comments · Fixed by #188
Assignees
Labels
correction API specification needs correction

Comments

@hdamker
Copy link
Collaborator

hdamker commented Jul 31, 2024

Problem description

documentation/CAMARA-API-access-and-user-consent.md contains about six links to the Profile document which are written as fully qualified URLs which are pointing to the main branch of ICM. The Profile contains one such link which points to documentation/CAMARA-API-access-and-user-consent.md

A reader within a release tree would jump out of the tree into a potential wrong version. The same for someone who has downloaded the release package (zip-file) of ICM.

Expected behavior

Use - as recommend by GitHub - relative links instead, concrete with the following replacements:
https://github.com/camaraproject/IdentityAndConsentManagement/blob/main/documentation/CAMARA-Security-Interoperability.md to be replace with CAMARA-Security-Interoperability.md
https://github.com/camaraproject/IdentityAndConsentManagement/blob/main/documentation/CAMARA-API-access-and-user-consent.md to be replaced with CAMARA-API-access-and-user-consent.md

Alternative solution

Additional context

@hdamker hdamker added the correction API specification needs correction label Jul 31, 2024
@hdamker
Copy link
Collaborator Author

hdamker commented Jul 31, 2024

@jpengar @AxelNennker If you agree, could someone of you take the PR for this issue?

@jpengar
Copy link
Collaborator

jpengar commented Jul 31, 2024

Let's talk about it in Today's call. I could easily do it in #181.

@hdamker
Copy link
Collaborator Author

hdamker commented Jul 31, 2024

It would be cleaner to do it in a short separate PR ... otherwise you have no PR you can mention in the Changelog ;-)

@jpengar
Copy link
Collaborator

jpengar commented Jul 31, 2024

It would be cleaner to do it in a short separate PR ... otherwise you have no PR you can mention in the Changelog ;-)

xD I can do that too

@hdamker
Copy link
Collaborator Author

hdamker commented Jul 31, 2024

xD I can do that too

Created #188 a few seconds before your comment :-)

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