Replace broken vocabulary item#79
Merged
Merged
Conversation
As per issue ivoa-std#24, replace a purl.org-based vocabulary item with a UAT one. As Markus protested in the issue discussion, this value is not particularly well-motivated, but it's an improvement on what was there before.
msdemlei
approved these changes
Feb 24, 2026
Collaborator
msdemlei
left a comment
msdemlei
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I can't say I'm particularly happy about showing something that at least I can't really explain, but if at least the link resolves and references an active concept, it's an improvement.
Member
Author
|
Your protest is there in the commit message, so if anybody does a git blame they'll see your reservations. |
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
As per issue #24, replace a purl.org-based vocabulary item with a UAT one. As Markus protested in the issue discussion, this value is not particularly well-motivated, but it's an improvement on what was there before.