-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 424
Update doctype-first.mdx #1735
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
Update doctype-first.mdx #1735
Conversation
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.
Code Review
This pull request simplifies the documentation for the doctype-first
rule by removing a redundant example. However, the change also removes a heading, which makes the remaining example lack context. I've added a suggestion to re-introduce the heading to maintain the document's clarity.
<html></html> | ||
``` | ||
|
||
```html |
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.
While removing a redundant example is a good simplification, the removal of the heading ### The following patterns are **not** considered rule violations
leaves this code block without context, making it unclear what the example demonstrates. To improve clarity, it's best to reintroduce a heading for this valid pattern example.
### The following patterns are **not** considered rule violations
```html
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.
Pull Request Overview
This PR streamlines the documentation for the doctype-first
rule by removing redundant examples and simplifying the content structure. The changes focus on eliminating duplicate examples while preserving the essential rule explanation and importance.
- Removed duplicate valid DOCTYPE placement example
- Simplified documentation structure by removing unnecessary section headers
- Maintained the invalid example that demonstrates the rule violation
|
||
- `true`: enable rule | ||
- `false`: disable rule | ||
|
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.
After removing the valid example section, this code block appears to show an invalid pattern but lacks proper context. Consider adding a section header like '### The following patterns are considered rule violations:' before this example to clarify that this demonstrates what the rule flags as problematic.
Copilot uses AI. Check for mistakes.
thanks for the PR but the example you removed was important to show that a comment is valid before the doctype. |
Short description of what this resolves
Removes redundant examples and streamlines the documentation for the
doctype-first
rule. Helps clarify how the rule works and why it matters.Proposed changes