ReSpec formating minutae

[bumblefudge]

NB @dmitrizagidulin @capjamesg

[capjamesg]

@bumblefudge Is this ready to be published as a CG Report? If so, I can add it to the W3C CG SWICG site. The report will appear linked on the W3C SWICG home page when it is added.

[bumblefudge]

@capjamesg I think so? I wasn't at the meeting but i did notice this when i was cleaning up the minutes:

Src

[capjamesg]

This specification is now published as a Draft.

The W3C site requires that any Final report starts with https://w3.org. I will contact the team to see what we can do.

[bumblefudge]

TBH i'm not really savvy as to the difference between DRAFT and FINAL, should there be some kind async review on-list or something? I certainly haven't read the various reports that the minutes say are final now 😅

In any case, thanks for fixing the initial metadata thing!

[capjamesg]

To the extent that you can send to the list for review by interested parties in the wider group, please do.

If the document has already been discussed and marked as Final in its current state, and approved by the group, it can be submitted for publication on the W3C website.

To get a W3C link, a report must be filed according to the instructions in https://github.com/w3c/cg-reports. I can then publish it as a Final report per the resolution of the group. When you file a PR to the repository, please tag Dmitri and I and include a link to the resolution from the group in this GitHub repository.

[trwnh]

@capjamesg @dmitrizagidulin I just saw this issue thread, but before I did, I should mention that I made two very minor changes:

• I accepted a PR that changed "Wordpress" to "WordPress"
• I made a commit that inserted a missing space, and also set the latestVersion in the respecConfig to point to https://www.w3.org/community/reports/socialcg/apwf/.

Now that I have seen this issue thread, I am wondering if setting the latestVersion manually was necessary, or if this somehow gets handled automatically or as part of some other process involved with publishing the report. Looking at the cg-reports repository you mentioned, I see this PR w3c/cg-reports#41 which seems to have published a CG-FINAL revision of the report on 2024-06-08. I am not sure what the next steps are, though... I would naively assume that perhaps a new PR is necessary against cg-reports in order to include the minor typographical fixes? CG-FINAL-apwf-20240919 (if published today)?

[capjamesg]

Great find. I didn't realise this had already been submitted and merged. Given this, I will set https://www.w3.org/community/reports/socialcg/CG-FINAL-apwf-20240608/ as the published report on the website.

On changes: I assume you can file a PR to make typographical errors without having to create a new version of the report.

[capjamesg]

https://www.w3.org/community/reports/socialcg/CG-FINAL-apwf-20240608/ is now published as a final report on the CG website. An email will be sent out to the list on the subject of Final Specification Commitments.

[trwnh]

Well, there's w3c/cg-reports#50 now, in case @capjamesg is correct and we don't need to create a new version of the report.

My other concern is that https://www.w3.org/community/reports/socialcg/apwf/ does not currently resolve properly, so there probably is something else that needs to be done.

[trwnh]

Okay, the minor fixes were merged in w3c/cg-reports#50 -- that just leaves two things to reconcile:

• Getting the "latest published version" to resolve to something other than a GitHub Pages 404
• Getting the editor's draft on GitHub Pages to show correct metadata for "This version"?

[trwnh]

A minor but non-typographical change was merged in 18f39e4 to clarify that WebFinger requests might redirect.

Tagging @dmitrizagidulin -- we still don't have a live "latest published version", and I'm guessing that the change I just merged necessitates a new PR against w3c/cg-reports as well.