I thought “what you catch in Vegas stays in Vegas” or am I remembering that tv commercial wrong
I’m assuming its part of the Documentation integration they have yet to remove, or simply forgot existed.
Yeah perhaps.
Unless they purposely kept it enabled to grab references for a future endeavor. I know they said something will eventually come out of the documentation experiment in the sunsetting announcement referenced above.
With your wide ranging knowledge and ability to effortlessly articulate yourself technically in understandable form, you would certainly be a wonderful contributor. Or perhaps you could foster and share those skills through other channels such as guest articles on sites, a book, blog, etc., if you would desire. Same goes for @krilnon, and of course @kirupa with all he does already.
Certainly not as fun as collecting plastic characters, but almost as worthy of a cause. 
Tourism would probably increase exponentially if that was the case, however I think as of now what you catch is considered your free parting gift for visiting. :pimp:
Except for all them Pokemon Go players!
2 Likes
1 Like
I work with Erika (and the other documentation team people!) I need to go and get my autograph book and get them all to sign it. I’m glad that everyone (Google as well) is collaborating on this. The fragmentation and duplicated API content was always painful to see 
Interesting stuff.
Good to see all the people that are making a difference with innovation ( Microsoft / Samsung / Google ) participating. Given that, I guess it’s only fitting Apple is not involved. Maybe when a button needs removed they will participate? 
I wonder why the article @kirupa posted mentioned Vivaldi but not Blisk, since its geared more for developers. Speaking of which Firefox Developer Edition / Tools are looking pretty nice now days.
Ok - I posted the first of the articles here: https://www.kirupa.com/html5/arrow_functions.htm The attribution information is the first thing before the main content shows up. It is a bit clunky going through the JSON file, getting the relevant details, and converting them into regular HTML. I wish this were something done better by the SO team.
I am not sharing this broadly just yet. I want you all to take a look at it and see if this works. One of the things I need to call out is that this information is designed to be more in the snippet-form of documentation as opposed to the “story-like” form that most of the articles here take.
Meh, that information isn’t any better than “official” documentation on mdn, and not as clear and in some ways misleading. Not sure its worth trying to port over web documentation like that if there’s already a better alternative. Not sure what else SO docs has that would be (I never knew about it until this thread)
1 Like
One main advantage is that it does allow gaps in content to be filled. But if the quality is low and confusing, then moving forward with it doesn’t make sense. For example, another topic I was considering was this one around Promises.
If this makes sense to move forward with other SO articles, these would all be in a section that I am tentatively calling TL;DR. That sets the expectation that it is a quick reference.
Is that how it would work here? I was assuming this would be more of a dump than a collaborative surface.
The Promises example starts off …promising… :trout: but then starts to …flounder… :trout: :trout: quickly after that.
The multiple posts reminds me of PHP documentation where there’s a lot of good information, but its scattered throughout a myriad of comments which can be hard to parse.
2 Likes
That settles it, then! The SO documentation will not migrate over. There is no reason to confuse web developers with low-quality content
I’m only one person here. Does anyone else disagree??
I guess that’s what I meant by originally saying …
Nuggets meaning if you dig around you may find something worthwhile, but not everything you find is worth retaining. Sadly like most information on the web.
However it was impressive the collective array of topics in which nuggets could be found. But perhaps it’s just fools gold to chase at this point?
Maybe it’s not worth trying to find the actual nuggets to make it worthwhile for the effort required to use them? Or perhaps something could be a springboard for inspiration on topics and only take and expand upon that which is worthy?
Does it really matter, until I posted this thread, no one seemed to know of it, just let it go. 
I am really glad you posted this thread, btw! All we are trying to do is find the right balance for using the content. Taking nuggets from it is totally a reasonable suggestion, and that may be something that I and others do as well. It will depend on a case-by-base basis. There is a tradeoff between writing the content ourselves vs. massaging existing content, so that will be something that needs to be balanced.
As senocular mentions, the quality of the documentation is a bit lacking once you look beyond the first/most-voted response. I feel if SO allowed the wiki to flourish a little bit longer, all of the quality issues would have been addressed and we could have used the content as-is without a time-consuming edit pass.
1 Like
You’re welcome.
Sometimes even a single nugget is worth the labor of extracting.
But yes sadly even regular StackOverflow/Exchange questions are flooded with nonsense and bad answers. It’s a great resource and community with a tremendous wealth of knowledge and experience. But if people just blindly use it they can easily be exposed to and learn many bad habits and gain poor or even incorrect information all in the same thread with worthy information.
Which is not good especially for newcomers trying to learn.
People really need to sift the information, cross reference and research diligently themselves to ensure what they are accepting is worthy to be accepted and is indeed the best approach and ultimately correct.
Sadly this is true for the web as a whole, or just talking to people. 
2 Likes