proofread section 2 Repository and 2.1 Repositories on Jakarta Data #343
Conversation
This file contains 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
…ies on Jakarta Data Signed-off-by: Nathan Rauh <[email protected]>
otaviojava
approved these changes
Nov 11, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There is one issue in this section that required some rearrangement of sections. The spec says that "The Jakarta Data specification supports two types of repositories. The first type consists of ..." and goes on an on about the first type, covering with multiple paragraphs and examples before transitioning into some general aspect that would apply to both types. Long before this point, the user is already lost wondering why they haven't heard of a second type, which eventually appears even further along in the document. I'm proposing to correct this by moving the common aspects to before the discussion of the type types, and then creating headings for the two types to clearly delineate them and make it obvious to the user that the spec does indeed discuss as second type and where to find it.