mCODE version update in Readme #163
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
julianxcarter
requested review from
Dtphelan1,
dmendelowitz,
jafeltra and
mgramigna
as code owners
jafeltra
approved these changes
Nov 18, 2021
Contributor
jafeltra
left a comment
jafeltra
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I like the link to the IG! It's definitely the more useful link to provide here.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Summary
Updates the README to reference that the extractor conforms to version 1.16.0 of the mCODE spec, and also updates the link to point to the mCODE build IG
New behavior
No new behavior.
Code changes
No changes to code.
Testing guidance
Just ensure that the README looks correct. The previous iteration linked to the mCODE IG's GitHub page (one that is no longer actively maintained). I thought it would be better to link to the IG page itself, but if folks disagree I can change the link to the currently maintained GitHub page.