docs: add schema example #91
Conversation
README.md
Outdated
| customElements.define('my-element', MyElement); | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| The output manifest would look like: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe "A manifest could look like"? Or also mention this example is in a package called my-project or that it has a readme?
There are things like readme being blank that a tool might fill in for an element, it'd be nice to be clear that if its tool generated the tool might have lots of opinions and features for how to fill out the manifest.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"Could" sounds ambiguous to me, we're specifying the schema in this repo so it would have to look exactly like the example shown
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think that necessarily true. For instance, this could contain source references for all the declarations. disabled sounds like a boolean, so the field could get a type. Conceivably someone could add extra descriptions to the manifest that aren't in the JS. Tools will have different features for extracting types, descriptions, etc...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For instance, this could contain source references for all the declarations
I wish I knew what a source reference is 😄
disabled sounds like a boolean, so the field could get a type.
Not all code is typed
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I thought I saw an issue from you about SourceReference documentation, but I don't see it now. Do you know where it is?
All values have a type and a developer could certainly write a type in a hand-written manifest. Point is that "could" really is the accurate descriptor here. There are multiple valid manifests per element.
No description provided.