docs(web-client): fix broken API reference link in README - #266
Open
midasbal wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Small one, spotted while reading through the web-client README. The "API Reference" link in the Usage section points at ../../docs/typedoc/web-client/README.md, which doesn't actually resolve anywhere a reader would land:
filesarray, so it doesn't ship in the npm tarball (and the README does, so npm readers hit a dead link)Looks like it's been like this since the initial port in #1. Since the typedoc output isn't hosted anywhere yet (#113), I repointed it to the canonical Web Client docs page the root README already links to, and relabeled it from "API Reference" to "Web Client docs" so the text matches where it goes.
One line, no content changes. prettier and typos pass (repo has no markdown linter).
On the changelog: doesn't look like it needs a CHANGELOG entry per the CLAUDE.md rules (no API / behavior / breaking change for consumers, plus the "when in doubt, no changelog" note), so I left it out. If a maintainer can add the
no changeloglabel that'll clear the check, or happy to add an entry if you'd prefer.