Make GraphQL reference compatible with markdownlint-cli 0.29.0
What does this MR do?
I noticed when using markdownlint-cli
0.29.0 that the proper-noun test has become stricter.
This is especially a problem in the GraphQL reference where lots of the same sort of error is generated. For example:
doc/api/graphql/reference/index.md:17651:6 MD044/proper-names Proper names should have the correct capitalization [Expected: ID; Actual: id]
doc/api/graphql/reference/index.md:17652:6 MD044/proper-names Proper names should have the correct capitalization [Expected: ID; Actual: id]
doc/api/graphql/reference/index.md:17653:6 MD044/proper-names Proper names should have the correct capitalization [Expected: ID; Actual: id]
doc/api/graphql/reference/index.md:17669:6 MD044/proper-names Proper names should have the correct capitalization [Expected: ID; Actual: id]
doc/api/graphql/reference/index.md:17685:6 MD044/proper-names Proper names should have the correct capitalization [Expected: ID; Actual: id]
doc/api/graphql/reference/index.md:17686:6 MD044/proper-names Proper names should have the correct capitalization [Expected: ID; Actual: id]
doc/api/graphql/reference/index.md:17687:6 MD044/proper-names Proper names should have the correct capitalization [Expected: ID; Actual: id]
doc/api/graphql/reference/index.md:17688:6 MD044/proper-names Proper names should have the correct capitalization [Expected: ID; Actual: id]
doc/api/graphql/reference/index.md:17689:6 MD044/proper-names Proper names should have the correct capitalization [Expected: ID; Actual: id]
I've just disabled the one affected test. I think it's our use of raw HTML in a table that's causing the difficulty (not a genuine error), but I don't think we lose too much turning off this check. We already have disabled all Vale testing anyway for most of the page.
Author's checklist
-
Consider taking the GitLab Technical Writing Fundamentals course -
Follow the: -
Ensure that the product tier badge is added to topic's h1
. -
Request a review based on: - The documentation page's metadata.
- The associated Technical Writer.
If you are only adding documentation, do not add any of the following labels:
~"feature"
~"frontend"
~"backend"
~"bug"
~"database"
These labels cause the MR to be added to code verification QA issues.
Review checklist
Documentation-related MRs should be reviewed by a Technical Writer for a non-blocking review, based on Documentation Guidelines and the Style Guide.
-
If the content requires it, ensure the information is reviewed by a subject matter expert. - Technical writer review items:
-
Ensure docs metadata is present and up-to-date. -
Ensure the appropriate labels are added to this MR. - If relevant to this MR, ensure content topic type principles are in use, including:
-
The headings should be something you'd do a Google search for. Instead of Default behavior
, say something likeDefault behavior when you close an issue
. -
The headings (other than the page title) should be active. Instead of Configuring GDK
, say something likeConfigure GDK
. -
Any task steps should be written as a numbered list. - If the content still needs to be edited for topic types, you can create a follow-up issue with the docs-technical-debt label.
-
-
-
Review by assigned maintainer, who can always request/require the above reviews. Maintainer's review can occur before or after a technical writer review. -
Ensure a release milestone is set.