fix: updating the specification file to correctly describe the application/vnd.cncf.model.weight.config.v1.raw mediaType

[ajit3259]

Description

This commit makes changes to avoid repeatation of the application/vnd.cncf.model.weight.config.v1.tar into application/vnd.cncf.model.weight.config.v1.raw mediaType in spec.md file and uses the description provided in mediatype.go to provide right description.

Related Issue

#132

Motivation and Context

I was recently learning about Docker Model runner and how they are using OCI specification for models. This led me to ModelPack and being interested in learning more about, I started learning about the spec and how is it adopting the OCI for model artifiact.

During this deep dive, I found repeatation in description of mediaType. To solve this, I made changes to keep the specs.md file mediaTypes description file inline with their intended purpose.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @ajit3259, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request refines the ModelPack specification documentation by clarifying the definition of a specific media type. It addresses an inconsistency where the raw media type was incorrectly described as a tar archive, ensuring that the documentation accurately reflects the unarchived and uncompressed nature of this configuration type.

Highlights

• Documentation Correction: The pull request corrects the description of the application/vnd.cncf.model.weight.config.v1.raw media type in the spec.md file.
• Clarity on Media Type: The description for the raw media type is updated to accurately state that it represents an "unarchived, uncompressed config" rather than a "tar archive", resolving a previous repetition and inaccuracy.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request correctly fixes the description for the application/vnd.cncf.model.weight.config.v1.raw media type in docs/spec.md. The change resolves an inconsistency and makes the specification clearer and more accurate.

While reviewing, I noticed a few other minor documentation inconsistencies in related files that could be good candidates for a follow-up pull request to further improve the project's documentation quality:

• In docs/spec.md, the descriptions for ...weight.v1.tar+gzip (line 49) and ...weight.v1.tar+zstd (line 51) seem to incorrectly refer to a "configuration file" instead of a "model weight file".
• In specs-go/v1/mediatype.go, there are a couple of minor issues in comments:
  • The comment for MediaTypeModelWeightConfigRaw (line 40) could be more precise by specifying "config of the model weights" instead of just "model weights".
  • The comment for MediaTypeModelWeightConfig (line 43) appears to have a typo, referencing MediaTypeModelConfig instead of MediaTypeModelWeightConfig.

These points are outside the scope of this PR, which is good as is. Nice work on this fix!

[chlins]

lgtm

[chlins]

@ajit3259 Thank you for catching that!

[bergwolf]

Thanks!