Skip to content

Spec 001, from #94's review: the authors' claim limited to the files' authors - #95

Merged
adamjohnwright merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
t020/authors-followup
Oct 29, 2026
Merged

adamjohnwright merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
t020/authors-followup

Conversation

@adamjohnwright

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Follow-up to #94 (spec 001, specs/001-biopax-from-graph/differences.md, "Authors' names"). Documentation only. It takes #94's review:

  • Medium: "in release 98's relational database these 62 alone held the first-name form" was wider than the evidence, since the published files name only the people who author cited literature. The claim is now limited to the authors the files name, and it says that people they don't name were not compared.
  • Minor: the one Person whose display name isn't rebuilt now has its reason. It is the interaction import's user, which the importer creates itself with its display name set directly (TrackingObjects.createGraphImporterUserNode), not read from the relational database.

Prettier passes. No names.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

… authors

The published files name only the people who author cited literature, so the
first-name form is said to be these 62's alone among those authors, not among
every Person in the relational database. The one Person whose display name
the importer does not rebuild is the interaction import's user, which the
importer makes itself (TrackingObjects.createGraphImporterUserNode).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@adamjohnwright
adamjohnwright merged commit 82e7e36 into main Oct 29, 2026
6 checks passed
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant