AriESQ
commented
2 years ago One solution would be to either remove the header linking to #browser_compatability anchor. This would fix the perception that this is a broken link. However, I disfavor that approach because this page may be based off of a template (I don't know how this documentation site works). And even if it isn't based off of a strict template, I support this page paralleling the format of the related pages I linked.
Inserting an empty table that the header could anchor link to would be a solution. It puts the reader on notice that the link works, it's just that the table is incomplete.
Also, adding https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/File_and_Directory_Entries_API/Firefox_support to the See Also section of https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/File_System_Access_API is a good option to take in tandem.
Looking at other pages, it does not appear to break document system convention to link internally to another MDN page. Compare with Wikipeida where See Also has a bias towards off-site links.
I may submit a PR with this two-pronged fix.
sideshowbarker
Josh-Cena
What page(s) did you find the problem on?
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/File_System_Access_API https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/File_and_Directory_Entries_API https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/File_and_Directory_Entries_API/Firefox_support
Specific page section or heading?
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/File_System_Access_API#browser_compatibility
What is the problem?
The information in https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/File_and_Directory_Entries_API/Firefox_support should be better surfaced to end users. There are competing standards rolled out in popular browsers and partial specification implementation on FireFox of proprietary Google (Chrome) extensions. This should be elevated so that the information of a higher visability.
This is compounded by the fact that https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/File_System_Access_API#browser_compatibility has a header for #browser_compatibility, but no chart (unlike other pages). This may lead user to think it is just a broken link. If there was a chart, it would put the reader on notice that this proposed spec is not implement across Browsers.
What did you expect to see?
I'm unclear if File_System_Access API is appropriate to use (in Firefox?) as it is still a draft W3C standard. I think there are a couple of things to clear up the documentation.
Add a Browser Compatability Chart, even if is currently unpopulated. That would be a clear indicator that this is a diverging spec.
Add a See Also link at the bottom of File_System_Access_API pointing to File_and_Directory_Entries_API/Firefox_support
Other? Because maybe I misunderstood this whole thing?
Did you test this? If so, how?
N/A