docs
docs copied to clipboard
withastro
Move `getStaticPaths` instructional content out of the reference page
The getStaticPaths content on our reference page is not reference content - it's better suited for a guides page. We link to it on our Routing guide, but that Routing guide should be the home for this content.
We've also gotten feedback that getStaticPaths is particularly difficult to understand, so it's worth revisiting how we explain it when we integrate it into that guides page.
The tutorial presents getStaticPaths in a more friendly beginner way; our docs could build off of that for our explanatory content.
The examples in the dynamic route section need another pass; we've seen support threads of people being confused by them.
Agreed that this could use another look at how the content is divided between pages.
In particular, and perhaps more urgently, now that each error message has their own page in the reference section, we should decide whether error messages should be their own category. Even the API reference docs for getStaticPaths are getting drowned out by error message returns.
And currently, getStaticPaths() is not even in a heading on the routing page, making it not visible in the right sidebar, but also, it doesn't show up in Algolia results AT ALL. So urgently, Routing page should get a quick-fix heading for this. But, I also think these Algolia results are not as helpful as they could be.
Note that our search doesn't bring you to the routing page at all - headers need rewriting.