Minor edit suggestions by @TallTed #259
Open
+19
−18
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
hartig
referenced
this pull request
Aug 14, 2025
Co-authored-by: Ted Thibodeau Jr <[email protected]>
|
The Echidna run for this PR failed as the whole repo seems to be out of date with respect to the global |
Tpt
approved these changes
Aug 14, 2025
hartig
added
the
spec:editorial
afs
approved these changes
Aug 15, 2025
Yes, indeed. Perhaps I made a mistake in the way I rebased (I am not doing that so often). In my local version of the feature branch for this PR, I did: After that, I did: But the latter (
I did the second (because I thought that this is what I have to do in order to rebase). After that, |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR implements a few edit suggestions that @TallTed had on commit f4977ce in PR #245 after the PR was already merged.
@TallTed, I included all your suggestions except for the one about code-fencing the keyword SELECT. That one I left out because, in this part of the spec, there are a lot of mentions of SPARQL keyword and none of them is code-fenced. Thus, code-fencing just this one mention of "SELECT" would be inconsistent with respect to the rest of this part of the spec.
Preview | Diff