-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 22.8k
Make all page status backed by some BCD #40308
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
--- | ||
|
||
{{DefaultAPISidebar("Topics API")}} | ||
|
||
> [!WARNING] | ||
> This feature is currently opposed by two browser vendors. See the [Standards positions](/en-US/docs/Web/API/Topics_API#standards_positions) section below for details of opposition. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe @chrisdavidmills might have thoughts about removing this
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There were very strong feelings at the time of the discussion that we needed these notes on API pages, where major vendors opposed the technology.
What were your thoughts on getting rid of them, @Josh-Cena?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is a guide page, not the main API landing page. The note is also a bit off because the section is on another page and not "below". I don't think a guide should talk about support status, and I've got multiple rounds of agreement on this opinion, so I will be removing all sorts of support indication (including vendor opposition) from "Using" type of guides.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah, so remove it from guides, but not API landing pages, interface refs, etc?
In which case, I'm on board. Thanks!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This note isn't about support status.
Let's not remove any standard position note without sign-off from @Rumyra.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actually I don't care enough about this note; I just found it out of place. I'll restore it for now.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Everything looks good, so a +1 from me. One comment about the standards position note that might be good to verify first.
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ slug: Web/SVG/Reference/Attribute/attributeType | |||
page-type: svg-attribute | |||
status: | |||
- deprecated | |||
spec-urls: https://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/animate.html#AttributeTypeAttribute | |||
browser-compat: svg.elements.animate.attributeType |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This doesn't have a spec_url, and it doesn't look deprecated, or at least it isn't marked as such:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Missing spec_url
key is not a blocker here, but do you want to get rid of the deprecated status?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not totally familiar with the SVG spec landscape but this attribute is defined in the SMIL spec only and not the SVG animation spec. I'll remove the status for now since it can be synced anyway. The spec link can be added later to BCD.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I reckon we probably ought to keep this, unless you've got a really good reason not to.
--- | ||
|
||
{{DefaultAPISidebar("Topics API")}} | ||
|
||
> [!WARNING] | ||
> This feature is currently opposed by two browser vendors. See the [Standards positions](/en-US/docs/Web/API/Topics_API#standards_positions) section below for details of opposition. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There were very strong feelings at the time of the discussion that we needed these notes on API pages, where major vendors opposed the technology.
What were your thoughts on getting rid of them, @Josh-Cena?
--- | ||
|
||
{{DefaultAPISidebar("Topics API")}} | ||
|
||
> [!WARNING] | ||
> This feature is currently opposed by two browser vendors. See the [Standards positions](/en-US/docs/Web/API/Topics_API#standards_positions) section below for details of opposition. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah, so remove it from guides, but not API landing pages, interface refs, etc?
In which case, I'm on board. Thanks!
Whereever we use
status
, I'm adding abrowser-compat
so they can be cross-checked. In this process I'm noticing some pages that shouldn't get a status, and one page with an incorrect page-type, even, so I'm fixing them alongside.