Accept open-close design doc #541
Merged
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
|
(chair 🎩 on) I presume that this is a proposal to accept the mooted design in the Monday call. If we choose something other than hash-and-slash, other changes would be merged here. Added |
|
I don't consider this closed unless we resolve the standalone. Decomposing complex problems helps up to a point, but below a certain level of granularity is bad. |
aphillips
approved these changes
Dec 18, 2023
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is what we discussed in the 2023-12-18 call. I think the wording is a bit weighted but we're due to discuss again in the 2024-01-08 call and @stasm will contribute further as well. Let's commit this so we can fix the ABNF.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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 updates the design doc to include
{#standalone/}markup as discussed on today's call, and should reflect the consensus reached during the meeting.This is a draft PR filed in support of the discussion in #537, and its eventual conclusion of the discussion on spannables/markup. We may want to amend this as an outcome of the discussion, but for now it's here to allow for the collection of the various historical issues that we'll be able to resolve with this.You are not expected to review this PR until we've settled on the matter in #537.Closes #240
Closes #262
Closes #375
Closes #424
Closes #537