Skip to content

fix(docs): repair 64 broken links in the Beryl/B20 spec - #1814

Open
pucedoteth wants to merge 1 commit into
base:masterfrom
pucedoteth:fix/b20-spec-broken-links
Open

fix(docs): repair 64 broken links in the Beryl/B20 spec#1814
pucedoteth wants to merge 1 commit into
base:masterfrom
pucedoteth:fix/b20-spec-broken-links

Conversation

@pucedoteth

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Problem

Every generated B20 interface reference page renders a [Related concept](…) link on line 7 that points into .../b20/specification/concepts/ or .../b20/specification/implementation/. Neither directory exists in this repo, so all 62 of those links 404 in production.

These pages are reachable by users — specification/index.mdx links into the generated reference tree — so the path is: spec → reference → method page → click "Related concept" → 404.

Verified live:

Broken target Links docs.base.org
…/specification/concepts/token-lifecycle 13 404
…/specification/concepts/policies-and-scopes 18 404
…/specification/concepts/variants-asset-vs-stablecoin 15 404
…/specification/concepts/roles-and-access-control 7 404
…/specification/concepts/architecture-and-precompiles 5 404
…/specification/implementation/deployment-and-initcalls-encoding 4 404
/base-chain/specs/upgrades/beryl/eip-8130 2 404

Fix

The concept material does exist — as sections of specification/index.mdx — so each link is repointed at the matching anchor:

Was Now
concepts/roles-and-access-control specification#roles-model
concepts/policies-and-scopes specification#policy-registry
concepts/variants-asset-vs-stablecoin specification#variants
concepts/architecture-and-precompiles specification#precompile-addresses
implementation/deployment-and-initcalls-encoding specification#factory
concepts/token-lifecycle specification (spans Mint / Burn / Seize / Supply Cap / Pause, so no single anchor fits)

Separately, beryl/overview.mdx links twice to /base-chain/specs/upgrades/beryl/eip-8130, which 404s — that page lives at /base-chain/specs/upgrades/**cobalt**/eip-8130 ("Native Account Abstraction").

Every destination and anchor id was checked against the rendered pages on docs.base.org. One line changed per link; no prose edits.

Notes for maintainers

  • The reference pages look machine-generated (description: "Generated B20 reference for …"). If so, the durable fix belongs in whatever generates them, or this will regress on the next run. Happy to adjust if you can point me at the generator.
  • beryl/overview.mdx still describes EIP-8130 as "upcoming in a later Beryl phase" while the page now lives under Cobalt. I only corrected the link — the prose seemed like a maintainer call.
  • If the concepts/ and implementation/ pages are planned rather than dropped, the alternative fix is to publish them and revert this. Either way the links shouldn't 404 in the meantime.

Every generated B20 interface reference page renders a "Related concept"
link pointing into `.../b20/specification/concepts/` or
`.../b20/specification/implementation/`. Neither directory exists, so all
58 + 4 of those links 404 in production. The pages are reachable (the
spec index links into the reference tree), so the path is:
spec -> reference -> method page -> click -> 404.

The concept material does exist, as sections of `specification/index.mdx`,
so repoint each link at the matching anchor:

  concepts/roles-and-access-control      -> #roles-model
  concepts/policies-and-scopes           -> #policy-registry
  concepts/variants-asset-vs-stablecoin  -> #variants
  concepts/architecture-and-precompiles  -> #precompile-addresses
  implementation/deployment-and-...      -> #factory
  concepts/token-lifecycle               -> the page itself, since it
      spans the Mint / Burn / Seize / Supply Cap / Pause sections

Separately, the Beryl overview links twice to
`/base-chain/specs/upgrades/beryl/eip-8130`, which 404s; that page lives
at `/base-chain/specs/upgrades/cobalt/eip-8130`.

All targets and anchors verified against docs.base.org.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@cb-heimdall

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

🟡 Heimdall Review Status

Requirement Status More Info
Reviews 🟡 0/2
Denominator calculation
Show calculation
1 if user is bot 0
1 if user is external 0
2 if repo is sensitive 0
From .codeflow.yml 1
Additional review requirements
Show calculation
Max 0
0
From CODEOWNERS 0
Global minimum 0
Max 1
1
1 if commit is unverified 1
Sum 2

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.

3 participants