-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 23
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
Describe included maps with examples. #207
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Typo: consolodated for consolidated ... otherwise great :)
index.html
Outdated
@@ -12246,6 +12515,13 @@ <h2>Keywords</h2> | |||
This keyword is described further in <a class="sectionRef" href="#context-definitions"></a>, | |||
and <a class="sectionRef" href="#default-vocabulary"></a>. | |||
</dd> | |||
<dt><code>@included</code></dt><dd> | |||
The `@included` keyword MUST NOT be aliased and MAY be used |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In the examples it's aliased to included
?
Huh? I don't see "consolodated" anywhere in the spec. |
index.html
Outdated
|
||
<section class="informative changed"><h3>Shared Value Indexing</h3> | ||
<p>It is sometimes the case that a nested data structure will repeat information. | ||
Using a <a>node reference</a> provides some opportunities for consolodating |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sorry, "consolodating" here.
Close in favor of #208? |
Yes, we should close the others once there’s consensus on the included blocks treatment. Practically speaking, that’s probably after the meeting on Friday. |
Closed in favor of #208. |
For #19.
Preview | Diff