OCP docs Vale review bot issues #744
Comments
|
@aireilly - record rule fixes here as they come up? |
|
Good idea. Fixed a few already. |
|
#748 kubelet stats receiver |
|
Https://github.com/openshift/openshift-docs/pull/73624/files#r1536274185 *.yaml should not trigger Vale errors Update. Fixed in https://github.com/openshift/openshift-docs/pull/73624/files#diff-4848024b39d7cc167c5cce941ad1c5cf0a735dac853dc7c4a3486d66a216efecL25 |
|
#750 - Removes Azure as an error term as too many false positives |
|
The VNIC/vNIC one is annoying. I think maybe a bug in Vale. We should create a test case and submit. Edit: errata-ai/vale#802 Another variation seen here: openshift/openshift-docs#66061 (comment) |
|
openshift/openshift-docs#74513 - fixes xrefs not getting flagged because of bad entry in accept.txt Vocab |
|
Closed attribute block should not fire for JSON in a code block: |
|
Container issue to report bugs with the ocpdocs-vale-bot:
PPC flagged incorrectly:(FIXED)https://github.com/openshift/openshift-docs/pull/72761/files#r1532156043
VT-d flagged incorrectly (?):(FIXED)openshift/openshift-docs#72761 (comment)
- openshift/openshift-docs#73626 (comment)(FIXED)openshift/openshift-docs#72364 (comment)
Use 'Kubelet' rather than 'Kubelet'
Use 'VNIC' rather than 'VNIC'.
Seems to be some issue with capitalization for suggestioned terms.
OBSDOCS-932: Add clarifications about storage in the Tempo docs openshift/openshift-docs#73716 (comment) - Azure Blob Storage is a product name. I don't think we need to say Microsoft Azure Blob Storage. Azure Blob Storage is a feature of Microsoft Azure.(FIXED)Consider moving Azure to a warning as too many false positives, lots of product features with Azure only in the title. https://redhat-documentation.github.io/supplementary-style-guide/#azure "Always refer to it as "Microsoft Azure" to provide clarity unless the term is repeated multiple times in a sentence or paragraph." The guidance in the SSG is not rock solid either.(FIXED)OCPBUGS-30076: Fixed minor bugs with OCI docs post 4.15 openshift/openshift-docs#72364 (comment) - edge case with commenting online outside of diff
Further investigation, some sort of reproduction of this error here. If you move a file, then add error content to a line, which is followed by an unmodified line that also has a Vale error, Vale fires on the unmodified line.
When I moved the file containing a Vale error, nothing happened.
When I deleted a space on the line preceding the unmodified line with the Vale error, nothing happened.
When I added a Vale error to the line preceeding the unmodified line with the Vale error, Vale flagged the unmodified line.
Very edge case???
Can/should we exclude bold content? Bold content is usually for GUI labels? The vale-bot is flagging content the writer cannot change because it's in the GUI. For example: OCPBUGS-30076: Fixed minor bugs with OCI docs post 4.15 openshift/openshift-docs#72364 (comment)
See A-Z and number characters between *s:
grep --include=*.adoc -rnw . -e '\*[A-Za-z0-9]*\*'The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: