[Extensions] Add iDOT to "Chunks Not Described Here", #530

[svgeesus]

As resolved, 15 Sept 2025

I added the primary reference as a bibliographic item, and added a few sentences to explain the previously un-registered but Public chunk.

I also had to clear up some syntactic issues that Bikeshed was objecting to:

• Authors are supposed to be a JSON array
• Incorrect reference to ISO646

Please confine review comments to the .bs source file, the html is auto-generated from that.

[leo-barnes]

@annevk, we should try to review this

[chrisn]

Looks good, assuming there's no more official document we can reference.

[svgeesus]

Looks good, assuming there's no more official document we can reference.

There is not.

[annevk]

@svgeesus did you see #530 (comment)? We plan on contributing the details.

[svgeesus]

@svgeesus did you see #530 (comment)? We plan on contributing the details.

I had not, when I made the PR.

Official details would be much better than reverse-engineered though, clearly, so I will set this PR to draft meanwhile.

[svgeesus]

@annevk @leo-barnes what sort of timescale do you have in mind for providing the details?

I am wondering whether to wait, or to merge now and improve the documentation later.

[annevk]

Yeah sorry, it's a little more involved than anticipated. I'm hoping we have something next week.

[svgeesus]

I am wondering whether to wait, or to merge now and improve the documentation later.

@leo-barnes @annevk any progress?

[leo-barnes]

I am wondering whether to wait, or to merge now and improve the documentation later.

@leo-barnes @annevk any progress?

We have tried to write up a spec document for the chunk given the implementation. We would like to have the person who wrote the code take a look at it to see if we missed any nuances, but he is unfortunately on leave. We'll give it another week or so.