[iherman]

Title tells it all. Note that the term itself had to be put into a <dfn> pair in the spec itself.

---

• Preview of the generated items

---

Preview | Diff

[iherman]

Note: the lint vocabulary error is (probably) related to an unsupported node engine (16), at least that is what the error message (also) says. See #146 which also handles that. Probably should be merged before this one.

[msporny]

LGTM.

One note, I think we don't want to use DFN to create these links, Ivan... that publishes the term to the specref database, which we don't want to pollute with data model terms... specref is supposed to be for terminology, not WebIDL-like things (IIUC). I might be wrong there, but using DFN to do these sorts of things feels like an abuse of a specref/ReSpec feature.

[iherman]

LGTM.

One note, I think we don't want to use DFN to create these links, Ivan... that publishes the term to the specref database, which we don't want to pollute with data model terms... specref is supposed to be for terminology, not WebIDL-like things (IIUC). I might be wrong there, but using DFN to do these sorts of things feels like an abuse of a specref/ReSpec feature.

Isn't it true that it goes in specref only if it is labeled as 'export'. All what we need is to have an easy way to have a real URL for each term. If not dfn, what? Do all that manually?

[msporny]

LGTM.
One note, I think we don't want to use DFN to create these links, Ivan... that publishes the term to the specref database, which we don't want to pollute with data model terms... specref is supposed to be for terminology, not WebIDL-like things (IIUC). I might be wrong there, but using DFN to do these sorts of things feels like an abuse of a specref/ReSpec feature.

Isn't it true that it goes in specref only if it is labeled as 'export'.

Yes, it only goes in specref if marked as "export"... but, I think you're doing that regularly in the spec :) -- IOW, I don't think we want to declare "ownership" over the definition of "registration" given that it's a data vocabulary property and not necessarily a human-readable term.

https://github.com/w3c/vc-recognized-entities/pull/147/changes#diff-0eb547304658805aad788d320f10bf1f292797b5e6d745a3bf617584da017051R713

All what we need is to have an easy way to have a real URL for each term. If not dfn, what? Do all that manually?

Manually isn't great either. Using DFN makes the CSS make the word bold, and so when reading the spec, some terms are bolded and others aren't and it's confusing to a casual reader why that is. Ideally, we'd have silent anchors to the vocabulary terms, or point to the section that defines the vocabulary term.

Perhaps we should have a <dfn class="term">registration</dfn> that specifically does not bold the word, but generated the anchor automatically to something like #vocabulary-registration or #term-registration? I wonder if we should be conflicting w/ the dfn-* anchor space for things. I'm likely over-thinking this... my biggest issue is the auto-bolding of some terms in the dictionary, and non-bolding of other terms, and how that is likely to confuse readers.