Skip to content

Conversation

Esther22225
Copy link

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

  • Removed duplicate examples of valid and invalid DOCTYPE placement
  • Simplified the config section
  • Preserved the explanation of why the rule is important

Copy link
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a 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
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

medium

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

@coliff coliff requested a review from Copilot September 22, 2025 01:45
Copy link
Contributor

@Copilot Copilot AI left a 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

Copy link
Preview

Copilot AI Sep 22, 2025

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.

@coliff coliff closed this Sep 22, 2025
@coliff
Copy link
Member

coliff commented Sep 22, 2025

thanks for the PR but the example you removed was important to show that a comment is valid before the doctype.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants