Dear @cf-convention/info-mgmt team, this PR relates to long-standing issue with the link checker, see: #318 #320

This is a first step to fix the issues with the link checker when PR are made.

The action is triggered when PR are open/re-open and

1. first check if all **/*.md files in the repo has no broken links, if so the action fails, in the summary of the action run, the resulting output can be seen, including when "everything" is "green". From https://github.com/cf-convention/cf-convention.github.io/actions/runs/8821086583?pr=486 :

Summary

Status	Count
🔍 Total	593
✅ Successful	495
⏳ Timeouts	0
🔀 Redirected	0
👻 Excluded	98
❓ Unknown	0
🚫 Errors	0

• I have had to fix some existing links to the rendered .html files, and change them to the actual .md which is what should be referenced in .md files instead, see commit 468dece
• the change at vocabularies.md has been tricky because the md file uses HTML tags.

2. If .md are ok, the action checks that building the site with Jekyll works and, if so, it uploads the artifact.

Please take a moment to review and let me know if this fits. If so, I will continue with the PR to incorporate the link check of the site at regular basis (i.e. cron job every Monday), or just we can merge this PR and open a new one PR for the that.

PS: annotation of the PR with a comment with the link check report it's a challenge due to security issues with PR from forks. If PR are from same repo (not) forks then PR and ISSUE commenting it's possible.

PS2: Checking links to GITHUB may raise and issue with the limit rate of GITHUB HTTP requests

Hi Antonio,

• the change at vocabularies.md has been tricky because the md file uses HTML tags.

I was recently adding some minor changes to this file, and noticed that there is actually very little markdown, and a lot of repetitive html links. I though that it maybe would be possible to generate this file dynamically during the build process. Something like a small [python] script looking for through the relevant ../Data/ directories for which versions exists and then assembles the file based on that and md text fragments, either read from file(s) or stored within the script. Could this be something to look further into (I'm afraid it's beyond my skill set)?

@larsbarring I have made a new PR at #487 with your suggestion to refactor vocabularies.md

Dear Antonio @cofinoa

Your work on this is very useful and much appreciated. Thanks! I would like to suggest that it makes the history of what's happened easier to follow if we keep to the practice of putting substantial comments in the issue, rather than PRs. That's because the issue is a continuous record of activity, whereas there can be lots of PRs, including comments on documents that aren't arranged serially. So I have copied the above comments from you and Lars into #318.

Best wishes

Jonathan