Skip to content
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

Reference links in annotations dependent on target argument #64

Open
eagr opened this issue Aug 20, 2022 · 3 comments
Open

Reference links in annotations dependent on target argument #64

eagr opened this issue Aug 20, 2022 · 3 comments

Comments

@eagr
Copy link
Contributor

eagr commented Aug 20, 2022

I noticed that the reference links we get from copying a requirement in the report relies on the target of duvet extract. Do you think that it's reasonable to decouple them?

The expected outcome would be executing duvet extract with a local file as target, but somehow being able to have urls pointing to specific sections of the desired spec in the generated report.

@eagr eagr changed the title The reference links in the generated report Reference links in annotations dependent on target argument Aug 22, 2022
@camshaft
Copy link
Member

camshaft commented Sep 2, 2022

We plan on introducing a config file to enumerate target aliases and canonical URLs. It would look something like:

[[compliance.spec.ietf]]
id = "quic-transport"
title = "QUIC: A UDP-Based Multiplexed and Secure Transport"
url = "https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9000.txt"
aliases = [
    "https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9000",
    "https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9000.html",
    "./path/to/local/rfc9000.txt",
]

@eagr
Copy link
Contributor Author

eagr commented Sep 2, 2022

url = "https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9000.txt"

This field alone would probably fix the problem I had. Curious what are the aliases for?

@camshaft
Copy link
Member

camshaft commented Sep 2, 2022

There are potentially many ways to refer to a spec and this would configure all of those resources as equivalent. So if you referred to datatracker.ietf.org or www.rfc-editor.org in your source it wouldn't matter; it would all be considered the same specification.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants