Skip to content

docs: stop claiming full syntax coverage - #902

Merged
owjs3901 merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/syntax-claims
Nov 14, 2026
Merged

owjs3901 merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/syntax-claims

Conversation

@owjs3901

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

  • Overview page: removed "full CSS-in-JS syntax coverage". It now says the syntax compiles broadly, that anything the build can't know is a located build error, and links the limitations page. The comparison table row is now "Syntax Coverage: Broad; the rest is a build error".
  • README_ko.md heading: "완전한 문법 지원" → "강력한 기능" (now matches the English "Full Power").
  • The English README was already fixed in an earlier change. No DOC-10 compatibility overclaims remain.

Refs #693 (DOC-01)

Test plan

  • Checked that no "full syntax" or "complete syntax" phrasing remains (repo-wide grep)
  • CI (landing build)

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

The overview page and the Korean README still promised complete CSS-in-JS
syntax coverage, while the limitations page lists what the build rejects.
They now say the syntax compiles broadly and that anything the build cannot
know is a located build error, linking the limitations page, as the English
README already does.

Refs #693

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@codecov

codecov Bot commented Nov 14, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@owjs3901
owjs3901 merged commit f44d0a3 into main Nov 14, 2026
27 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant