Clarify that zarr layout given in spec is an example #277
Conversation
Automated Review URLs |
| Changelog {#changelog} | ||
| ====================== | ||
|
|
||
| Version 0.6 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you mean 0.6 here? If so, I understand this to be a collection of more fine-grained changes between versions. If so, can we move it to the top-level? This could lead to confusion as to the state of "0.6" if in the 0.5 spec which could lead to confusion.
But maybe you meant this is part of 0.5? Sorry. A bit confused.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So in my head 0.5 is released and therefore fixed, because it is not versioned at a more granular level (e.g., 0.5.0, 0.5.1, 0.5.2). See my reasoning for why I think 0.x should be fixed on release in #278 (comment).
If so, can we move it to the top-level?
I don't see the harm (and I think it makes it easier to understand) in calling out which version a change happened in (and coversely, what list of changes happened in a given version)
This all ties back to #276 it seems - shouldn't there be an "active development" version of the spec, which changes are made against, which will become the version after the most recent versioned release?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm.... to be clear: did you edit in /latest/ or in /0.5/? @normanrz's PR may have moved your target.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Latest is currently symlinked to /0.5/: 72c4430, so I don't think there is a latest copy at the moment?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nope. That was what I was trying to figure out. If you had made your change on /latest/ then @normanrz's change automagically integrated it.
This is a minor language clarification to switch from saying that this example is the "expected" layout to saying that it is a valid example.
I have made this change because I think "expected" could be interpreted as "this is what the spec says your layout should be", but I think the intent here was actually "here's a useful example of what a typical layout would be".
Note that I also added a new changelog section to the spec, because changes like this should get a changelog entry (see #275). This is just so I don't forget to include a changelog somewhere, and not an assumption on what the final location/format of that changelog will be, which can be discussed in #275.