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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Little clarification on buffer.type #629

Closed
lexaknyazev opened this issue Jun 19, 2016 · 6 comments
Closed

Little clarification on buffer.type #629

lexaknyazev opened this issue Jun 19, 2016 · 6 comments
Labels
2.0 resolved specification

Comments

@lexaknyazev
Copy link
Member

Some time ago (#141, #233), text was added as a valid value for buffer.type enum for future compression support.

At the moment (1.0-1.0.1), spec doesn't define any compression method. Nor it defines what to do with assets with buffer.type: "text".

Maybe it will be reasonable to remove text from valid values enum forbuffer.type for 1.0.1, and propose it later via specific compression extension?
@pjcozzi
Copy link
Member

pjcozzi commented Jun 23, 2016

Yes, I agree. Thanks for catching this.

Can you please open a PR into the 1.0.1 branch with the spec/schema update?

@lexaknyazev lexaknyazev mentioned this issue Jun 23, 2016
Merged
@pjcozzi pjcozzi mentioned this issue Jun 23, 2016
Closed
@lexaknyazev
Copy link
Member Author

Spec mentions also text in description (L333). Should we change that?

@pjcozzi
Copy link
Member

pjcozzi commented Jun 23, 2016

Yes, please.

@lexaknyazev lexaknyazev mentioned this issue Jun 23, 2016
Merged
@lexaknyazev
Copy link
Member Author

@pjcozzi Could you label this issue as resolved?

@pjcozzi
Copy link
Member

pjcozzi commented Jun 29, 2016

Yes, labeled.

@javagl javagl mentioned this issue Dec 1, 2016
Closed
@pjcozzi pjcozzi mentioned this issue Jan 3, 2017
Closed
lexaknyazev added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 2, 2017
@lexaknyazev
Removed "text" form buffer.type. See #629.
93d2402
@pjcozzi
Copy link
Member

pjcozzi commented Jun 15, 2017

Updated in #826

@pjcozzi pjcozzi closed this as completed Jun 15, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
2.0 resolved specification
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@pjcozzi @lexaknyazev