Fixing typos/syntax errors #520
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Alexios Zavras (zvr) <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This change is consistent with the naming conventions of SPDX, however, the security profile is attempting to have the resultant JSON Schema match the CVSS schema and this change will make them different.
Since there is a direct mapping, I'm OK with using the SPDX conventions, but @jeff-schutt @tsteenbe @rnjudge should also review
I would move this into a separate PR to give the security team time to review. If the current state causes the spec-parser to fail, then I would suggest merging it in and adding a new issue to discuss the incompatibility.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is about entries for a vocabulary, which are automatically converted to IRIs of individuals in RDF.
The process of generating the JSON Schema already does many transformations, as it's not a 1:1 correspondence. If the requirement is to have them appear as upper-case strings, this is easily done at that stage.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The process of generating the JSON Schema already does many transformations, as it's not a 1:1 correspondence. If the requirement is to have them appear as upper-case strings, this is easily done at that stage.
Based on the above, it sounds like we can go ahead and move forward with this PR pending one more review.
I'll leave it up to the security profile group to decide if it is important to maintain uppercase.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ok, let's apply this, and then ask them to do a pass.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ok, let's apply this, and then ask them to do a pass.
This fixes various issues that the (new) spec-parser points out.
Among them: