The class remarks provides all the details but I think saying just "name" is not clear enough. For me, I was looking at generated code and I did not know what the "name=" means. This enhancement of the documentation would have been everything I needed to understand what the generated code does.
Thank you for sumitting this PR. I agree that adding an example of how a named connection string looks like is an improvement. However:
As indicated in the readme file, this repository only contains infrastructure and metadata for building the Entity Framework Core and EF6 API reference documentation. This change would need to happen in the source code for EF6, as these strings are re-generated automatically from the XML docs (this is why usually don't monitor PRs in this repo).
Because "for the database to which a connection will be made" was moved early in the sentence the idea of "connection string for the database" that the original text was trying to convey is lost.
The new text doesn't add clarity on the fact that "name" refers to the "name of a connection string". It just says that it is in the config file.
The class remarks provides all the details but I think saying just "name" is not clear enough. For me, I was looking at generated code and I did not know what the "name=" means. This enhancement of the documentation would have been everything I needed to understand what the generated code does.