Inconsistent Ordering of fields for “Batch Metafields”

[atensoftware]

Currently, the documentation lists the fields in this order:

permission_set namespace key value description resource_type resource_id id date_created date_modified owner_client_id

An actual API call emits the data in this order: "id" "key" "value" "namespace" "permission_set" "resource_type" "resource_id" "description" "date_created" "date_modified" "owner_client_id"

Instead, the documentation should list the fields in the same order as the API output. In this case, the API output is in a more logical order and is far preferred to the ordering listed in the documentation. If possible, the preferred ordering would be:

"id" "namespace" "key" "value" "resource_id" "resource_type" "description" "permission_set" "owner_client_id" "date_created" "date_modified"

In general, throughout the BC documentation and API, field names should be listed in a logical order or alphabetical order, and ordered consistently in the field list, example JSON, and actual API output. It's a big project to go through all that, but would it would improve the documentation considerably IMHO.

[slsriehl]

Hey @atensoftware -- See the mentioned PR #282 for reordering in this case. It will be live next time the site rebuilds.

We've made a roadmap ticket to work on ordering throughout the docs.

Thanks for opening this issue and building with BigCommerce!