Relative JSON Pointer does not include JSON Pointer, but fits with it separately #446
Conversation
This file contains 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
In particular, they are adjacent related specifications, with neither including the other.
This is still primarily Geraint's work.
epoberezkin
approved these changes
Oct 19, 2017
gregsdennis
added
clarification
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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 addresses the source of a moderately absurd grammatical argument that @epoberezkin and I had in #115. I took @epoberezkin interpretation and made it explicit in the specification language and gave it a section to clarify it. Writing the hyper-schema spec with Relative JSON Pointer, it seemed more useful to be able to indicate each syntax separately. So while I did not originally read it this way, I think @epoberezkin interpretation is the more helpful one.
Also fix a typo and add a change log.