The "Provider Features" table is too wide; users don't naturally see the right-most columns

[tlimoncelli]

Describe the bug

The "Provider Features" table is too wide; users don't naturally see the right-most columns

This page: https://docs.dnscontrol.org/getting-started/providers

To Reproduce
Steps to reproduce the behavior:

1. Go to https://docs.dnscontrol.org/getting-started/providers
2. You can't (without scrolling) see the right column.
3. When you do scroll, you don't see the row heads (provider names).

Expected behavior
Users should always see the row headers.

Some ideas:

• Replace the rtype columns (ALIAS, CAA, HTTPS, LOC, NAPTR, PTR, SOA, SRV, SSHFP, SVCB, TLSA, DS, DHCID, DNAME, DNSKEY) with a single column that lists the names of the supported records: A, MX, CNAME, LOC, PTR, TLSA.
  • The list should be a fixed-width, and word-wrap.
  • The list doesn't have to list records that all providers support: A, MX, CNAME
• Alternatively, make a 2nd table that just lists which record types are supported.

DNS Provider

• n/a

Additional context
CC @cafferata

[cafferata]

Thanks for raising this issue! I agree that the current “Provider Features” table is quite wide, and it might not offer the best user experience.

However, I’m starting to wonder if this table should even be supported going forward. I’ve always questioned what this table really tells me, especially when I’m not using the specific providers listed. Instead, I previously suggested in #1998 that we move this information to the individual provider pages. This way, everything can be consolidated in one place for each provider, including:

• Configuration
• Metadata
• Supported features
• Usage examples
• Limitations/Known issues
• Maintainer info
• And more…

What do you think of this idea? I believe it would provide a cleaner, more useful structure.

Looking forward to hearing your thoughts!

[tlimoncelli]

Thank you for the feedback!

I see the value of putting this information on the individual provider pages, but it is also useful to have a table. There is marketing value to being able to point people to a big list of providers, with indications of which have official support, and which are registrar-only, dns-only, or both. It helps people know if DNSControl is right for them. It also (hopefully) shames vendors who's support is limited.

Tom