-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 72
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Look for duplicate exported dfns #306
Comments
See also w3c/aria#1510 |
in the list of same name, different types, there were 6 were the duplicate came from the same spec (Trusted Types), due to a bug in the markup - PR filed at w3c/trusted-types#348 re "character" in the first list, it's interesting that the visible term in Infra is actually "code point", with character only provided as an alternate linking text - maybe one that should be deprecated given the ambiguity of the term.
|
Note code that produces the previous report is in a dedicated Reffy branch: |
I leave a note here but please tell me if you prefer that I open a dedicated issue.
<!-- Markup for the modern syntax -->
<pre class="prod highlight">
<dfn class="dfn-paneled" data-dfn-type="function" data-export="" id="funcdef-hsl">
<c- nf="">hsl</c-><c- p="">()</c->
</dfn>
<!-- ... -->
</pre>
<!-- Markup for the legacy syntax -->
<pre class="prod highlight">
<c- nf="">hsl</c-><c- p="">()</c->
<!-- ... -->
</pre> I'm not sure what to suggest and where to suggest it. I believe that Bikeshed should allow defining a legacy syntax that |
Reflecting on the duplicate IDL dfns:
|
Marking the definition as non-exported should be an easily accepted patch there
From the discussion in w3c/reffy#732, I believe it was indeed preferred to keep WebIDL as an intermediary, although I'm not sure how deeply discussed this was. |
Some of these are different concepts altogether of terms that happen to be the same across specs (e.g. an attribute in DOM is quite different from an attribute in WebIDL); some of these are for concepts that are pretty close but not fully equivalent definitions (e.g. surrogate in Infra & I18N glossary); some of these are explicitly duplicate definitions that happen to be repeated for mostly logistical / editorial reasons (e.g. the overlap between rdf concepts & rdf semantics; the duplicates across CSS modules). I think these 3 categories probably lead to different type of solutions:
|
Some specs define and export terms that are defined elsewhere, see e.g. discussion in https://github.com/w3c/respec/issues/3687
There may be valid cases where this is needed. It would be good to first look at exported dfns and list terms that are defined more than once.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: