-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.5k
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
Fix citation formats [R4R] #2371
Conversation
Hi! I'm a bot, and I wanted to automerge your PR, but couldn't because of the following issue(s):
|
EIPS/eip-100.md
Outdated
@@ -35,5 +35,5 @@ Changing the denominator from 10 to 9 ensures that the block time remains roughl | |||
|
|||
### References | |||
|
|||
1. EIP 100 issue and discussion: https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/issues/100 | |||
1. EIP 100 issue and discussion: https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-100 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This seems to be a recursive declaration.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe the solution here is that these self-links can go under the discussion-to metadata and I can take them out of the references like this.
(But if there is a specific comment that is being linked to I would keep that.)
What do you think about that?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm a bit confused, why is the original reference to the discussion forum a bad thing?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
For most situations I think it makes sense to link to the web page (i.e. eips.ethereum.org/eip-number) but in this case where we're referencing the "issue and discussion" I feel like the GitHub link is most relevant, so that people can view & add to the discussion.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
To clarify, this change is in the EIP-100 file, which is rendered on eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-100 where it links back to itself. If that reference link is kept, it makes a lot of sense to keep it as a useful link.
EIPS/eip-1261.md
Outdated
@@ -364,7 +364,7 @@ Membership Verification Token ERC1261 -- a reference implementation | |||
1. ERC-20 Token Standard. https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/blob/master/EIPS/eip-20.md | |||
1. ERC-165 Standard Interface Detection. https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/blob/master/EIPS/eip-165.md | |||
1. ERC-725/735 Claim Registry https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/blob/master/EIPS/eip-725.md |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
These above could have been changed.
EIPS/eip-170.md
Outdated
@@ -25,5 +25,5 @@ Currently, there remains one slight quadratic vulnerability in Ethereum: when a | |||
|
|||
### References | |||
|
|||
1. EIP-170 issue and discussion: https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/issues/170 | |||
1. EIP-170 issue and discussion: https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-170 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Recursive, again.
@axic Mostly motivated by ethereum/ethereum-org-website#343 |
@axic @samajammin In the interest of keeping this PR moving I have excluded the part which changes a "issue and discussion" link from eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/xxx to GitHub.com/ethereum/eips/issues/xxx That is a whole topic which affects a few EIPs (and relates to SEO). But to Always Be Merging, I'm hoping to get this PR done without that. |
EIPS/eip-1484.md
Outdated
- [ERC-191 Signatures](https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/issues/191) | ||
- [ERC-725 Identities](https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/issues/725) | ||
- [ERC-191 Signatures](https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-191) | ||
- [ERC-725 Identities](https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-725) | ||
- [ERC-1056 Identities](https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/issues/1056) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This actually got merged: https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-1056
EIPS/eip-1462.md
Outdated
@@ -22,9 +22,9 @@ The scope of this standard is being kept as narrow as possible to avoid restrict | |||
|
|||
## Motivation | |||
|
|||
There are several security token standards that have been proposed recently. Examples include [ERC-1400/ERC-1411](https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/issues/1411), also [ERC-1450](https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/issues/1450). We have concerns about each of them, mostly because the scope of each of these EIPs contains many project-specific or market-specific details. Since many EIPs are coming from the respective backing companies, they capture many niche requirements that are excessive for a general case. | |||
There are several security token standards that have been proposed recently. Examples include [ERC-1400/ERC-1411](https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/issues/1411), also [ERC-1450](https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-1450). We have concerns about each of them, mostly because the scope of each of these EIPs contains many project-specific or market-specific details. Since many EIPs are coming from the respective backing companies, they capture many niche requirements that are excessive for a general case. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is actually called "ERC-1400".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Got it. Here is a pure-play PR that fixes that #2414
EIPS/eip-1261.md
Outdated
@@ -364,7 +364,7 @@ Membership Verification Token ERC1261 -- a reference implementation | |||
1. ERC-20 Token Standard. https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/blob/master/EIPS/eip-20.md |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe update this to eips.ethereum.org
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You got it. Fixed at f87cc3a
EIPS/eip-1261.md
Outdated
@@ -364,7 +364,7 @@ Membership Verification Token ERC1261 -- a reference implementation | |||
1. ERC-20 Token Standard. https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/blob/master/EIPS/eip-20.md | |||
1. ERC-165 Standard Interface Detection. https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/blob/master/EIPS/eip-165.md |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
And this too.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Fixed at f87cc3a
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This only updates links to the canonical eips.ethereum.org format. It is fine in my opinion.
No description provided.