Conversation
There are multiple reasons for this: - Bio.tools editting didn't work (bio-tools/biotoolsRegistry#573) - Test what future bot PRs do with files updated by people
|
I would not be too worried about the diff. This only tells use that we need a unified formatting of JSONs. Than the diffs look much better. So we need to autoformat json with a common schema. |
Exactly! But how to do that? Do you have experience with it / working examples? E.g.: How does it work with the XMLs in Galaxy and the Conda recipes? If they are editted only manually, it's not an issue. But the combination of graphical editting in a tool, and manual editting as text, causes troubles. This problem is of course enormous in EDAM 😟 |
|
Thanks a lot for reporting this. There are three different matters here:
As for EDAM, this should probably be discussed in an issue on the repository itself. One thing I would advocate is adopting the same strategy, but for an RDF-XML file. This could be harder, because there are "rules" for the formatting of EDAM in order to maintain its readability in a raw text format. |
There are multiple reasons for this:
Bio.tools editting didn't work (🐛❗ Bug with validating and saving a record bio-tools/biotoolsRegistry#573)
Test what future bot PRs do with files updated by people
❗❗❗ This also points to the fact that the diff is completely useless here, rendering the whole GitHub workflow with PR reviews impossible 😥😥 (at least not if JSON editted outside of Bio.tools) @bgruening @hmenager