Skip to content

docs(spec): settle the last three provisional readings - #22

Merged
CameronBrooks11 merged 5 commits into
mainfrom
docs/settle-last-provisional-readings
Oct 21, 2026
Merged

CameronBrooks11 merged 5 commits into
mainfrom
docs/settle-last-provisional-readings

Conversation

@CameronBrooks11

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

The owner ruled on 2026-10-20 that the three readings still marked provisional in SPEC.md are final as drafted:

  • comments and blank lines may stand inside a block (§4.2, §6);
  • duplicate-edge compares labels as bytes after removing leading and trailing WSP (§4.6);
  • after subgraph, the whole run of WSP is skipped before the subgraph-without-id test (§4.7).

SPEC.md

  • The (provisional) markers come out of §4.2 rule 5, §4.6, §4.7 and §6.
  • The three bullets move into Settled by the owner, 2026-10-20 in §12, each in the place it held in the original list (the order docs(spec): record the owner's rulings on the provisional readings #19 kept). The ruling on ::: and @{ stays last, so "except the last" still holds.
  • The status paragraph and §12's opening now say that no reading is provisional, and still say how a provisional reading would be marked and listed.
  • §10 keeps the provisional tag defined and adds that no case carries one now.

Conformance cases

The seven cases that pinned these readings drop the provisional tag from expect.json, the way #19 handled the other settled readings. Each also drops its **Pins the provisional reading (§12):** line in WHY.md, since no other settled case carries that line any more. The README's Provisional readings pinned table is replaced by a note that none remain. No outcome changes. WHY.md quotes of SPEC.md at 055509e are left as they are.

Gates

just check          rc=0  (344 files already formatted; All checks passed!)
just test           rc=0  (415 passed)
just conform        rc=0  322 case(s): 322 passed, 0 failed, 0 malformed; 0 provisional, 0 of them failed
just conform-exact  rc=0  322 case(s): 322 passed, 0 failed, 0 malformed; 0 provisional, 0 of them failed
just mutants        rc=0  118 mutant(s), 2 equivalent, 0 problem(s)

The owner ruled on 2026-10-20 that the three readings still marked
provisional are final as drafted: comments and blank lines may stand
inside a block (§4.2, §6); duplicate-edge compares labels as bytes
after removing leading and trailing WSP (§4.6); and after subgraph the
whole run of WSP is skipped before the subgraph-without-id test (§4.7).

Drop their markers from the text, move their bullets into the
"Settled by the owner" list at their original positions, and reword
the status paragraph and the opening of §12 so they hold with no
reading provisional. The provisional tag stays defined in §10 for
any future reading.

The seven cases that pinned these readings drop their tag and the
matching line in WHY.md, as the other settled cases did; no outcome
changes.

Signed-off-by: Cameron Brooks <95648474+CameronBrooks11@users.noreply.github.com>
Removing the provisional marker left one line of the comment rule at
97 characters. Re-wrap the rest of the paragraph to the file's width;
the text is unchanged.

Signed-off-by: Cameron Brooks <95648474+CameronBrooks11@users.noreply.github.com>
Note in the provenance section that the last seven provisional tags
and their seven "Pins the provisional reading" lines in WHY.md were
removed when the owner settled the last three readings, as the tags of
the other 23 were before.

Signed-off-by: Cameron Brooks <95648474+CameronBrooks11@users.noreply.github.com>
The README said boundary twins are named ...-accepted and ...-refused,
as if each pair had one of each. Since §4.2 rule 3 refuses any line
holding ::: or @{, both twins of some pairs are refused, so say each
case is named for its own outcome.

Signed-off-by: Cameron Brooks <95648474+CameronBrooks11@users.noreply.github.com>
@CameronBrooks11
CameronBrooks11 merged commit f260709 into main Oct 21, 2026
7 checks passed
@CameronBrooks11
CameronBrooks11 deleted the docs/settle-last-provisional-readings branch October 21, 2026 02:00
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant