-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 22.5k
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
fix(docs): add a page describing everything about feature statuses #31941
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
21 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
c6f092a
fix(docs): add a page describing everyging about standardization stat…
OnkarRuikar 48f0831
Apply suggestions from code review
OnkarRuikar 5236b5e
standardization->technology
OnkarRuikar d5a1c8e
Apply suggestions from code review
OnkarRuikar 73c7989
address review comments
OnkarRuikar 07c1224
fix flaws
OnkarRuikar 0d32715
Apply suggestions from code review
OnkarRuikar 34fac5e
address review comments
OnkarRuikar 3f05579
rename to 'feature status'
OnkarRuikar 2302899
Apply suggestions from code review
OnkarRuikar 0daa2f9
make separate sections in all the templates
OnkarRuikar 6b74d0b
Update files/en-us/mdn/writing_guidelines/page_structures/banners_and…
OnkarRuikar df310c7
Apply suggestions from code review
OnkarRuikar d4a9c9d
address review comments
OnkarRuikar 7eb28ed
address review comments
OnkarRuikar a31336e
Update files/en-us/mdn/writing_guidelines/page_structures/banners_and…
hamishwillee 3395248
Apply suggestions from code review
OnkarRuikar 39ff598
address review comments
OnkarRuikar 17888ff
Apply suggestions from code review
OnkarRuikar 5ad9cfa
Update banners and notices
hamishwillee fd0a425
cover the case of multiple 'browser-compat' values
OnkarRuikar File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.
FWIW I disagree with this section (but not something for this PR to discuss). If a feature only ever appeared behind a flag it can be immediately removed if the docs on removal from the browser. Why? It was never part of the web platform or expectation if it was only ever behind a preference.
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.
@wbamberg Is this a typo? I.e. if something is behind a preference always (i.e. never been released) can't we immediately remove it if that feature is removed from the browser?
Note that this is the same instruction as the next section which covers the case of when something was released
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've not thought a lot about these rules tbh. Personally it seems like it would be OK to remove the docs immediately in this situation.
It's a bit odd to see a "guidelines for removing content" section that doesn't mention browser support, which AFAIK is the main rule we use to decide when to delete things. The idea I suppose being that if a feature is still supported, then people might still be using it, so need to have docs. And whether something's deprecated or not is not relevant to that.
Almost, except this has (vaguely and unhelpfully):
...and the other has:
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 think we should explicitly state that we reflect the BCD rules for all these cases. For this particular case that means immediate removal. Otherwise there is no trigger to do so. I could do an update after this gets merged if there is interest.
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.
Are you referring to https://github.com/mdn/browser-compat-data/blob/main/docs/data-guidelines/index.md#removal-of-irrelevant-features ? Because that says nothing about deprecation, standardization, etc. Which implies that a feature being removed from the specs changes nothing, and makes me wonder why we even cover this in a page about deprecation etc.
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.
Yes. So for the general case you're right - but for this specific case of something that "should be removed rather than deprecated" it would do no harm.