fix(number-verification): correct RFC 2119 keywords and indentation in description - #263
Merged
bigludo7 merged 1 commit intoSep 28, 2026
Conversation
hdamker
requested review from
AxelNennker,
bigludo7 and
fernandopradocabrillo
as code owners
September 27, 2026 06:05
bigludo7
approved these changes
Sep 28, 2026
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
What type of PR is this?
correction
What this PR does / why we need it:
Two formatting corrections in
info.descriptionofnumber-verification.yaml, found while reviewing the r4.1 release PR (#262):MUST not→MUST NOTin the refresh-token and token-expiration requirements, the RFC 2119 keyword form.authorization-and-authentication:ENDmarker and of the API-specific paragraph that follows it.No change to the API behaviour or to the Commonalities template text.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
None
Special notes for reviewers:
The
MAY notinside theadditional-error-responsesblock is left as is, since that text comes from the Commonalities template.Changelog input
Additional documentation
This section can be blank.