Commit Graph

11 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Anders Kaseorg 768f9f93cd docs: Capitalize Markdown consistently.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulip.com>
2020-08-11 10:23:06 -07:00
Rohitt Vashishtha 912e372c4e markdown: Remove !avatar() and !gravatar() syntax.
This particular commit has been a long time coming. For reference,
!avatar(email) was an undocumented syntax that simply rendered an
inline 50px avatar for a user in a message, essentially allowing
you to create a user pill like:

`!avatar(alice@example.com) Alice: hey!`

---

Reimplementation

If we decide to reimplement this or a similar feature in the future,
we could use something like `<avatar:userid>` syntax which is more
in line with creating links in markdown. Even then, it would not be
a good idea to add this instead of supporting inline images directly.

Since any usecases of such a syntax are in automation, we do not need
to make it userfriendly and something like the following is a better
implementation that doesn't need a custom syntax:

`![avatar for Alice](/avatar/1234?s=50) Alice: hey!`

---

History

We initially added this syntax back in 2012 and it was 'deprecated'
from the get go. Here's what the original commit had to say about
the new syntax:

> We'll use this internally for the commit bot.  We might eventually
> disable it for external users.

We eventually did start using this for our github integrations in 2013
but since then, those integrations have been neglected in favor of
our GitHub webhooks which do not use this syntax.

When we copied `!gravatar` to add the `!avatar` syntax, we also noted
that we want to deprecate the `!gravatar` syntax entirely - in 2013!

Since then, we haven't advertised either of these syntaxes anywhere
in our docs, and the only two places where this syntax remains is
our game bots that could easily do without these, and the git commit
integration that we have deprecated anyway.

We do not have any evidence of someone asking about this syntax on
chat.zulip.org when developing an integration and rightfully so- only
the people who work on Zulip (and specifically, markdown) are likely
to stumble upon it and try it out.

This is also the only peice of code due to which we had to look up
emails -> userid mapping in our backend markdown. By removing this,
we entirely remove the backend markdown's dependency on user emails
to render messages.

---

Relevant commits:

- Oct 2012, Initial commit        c31462c278
- Nov 2013, Update commit bot     968c393826
- Nov 2013, Add avatar syntax     761c0a0266
- Sep 2017, Avoid email use       c3032a7fe8
- Apr 2019, Remove from webhook   674fcfcce1
2020-07-07 10:39:44 -07:00
Tim Abbott a0c2121958 docs: Advertise Slack-compatible webhook a bit.
This should make it discoverable enough that users will try it out and
send us feedback.
2020-05-11 00:07:28 -07:00
Stefan Weil d2fa058cc1
text: Fix some typos (most of them found and fixed by codespell).
Signed-off-by: Stefan Weil <sw@weilnetz.de>
2020-03-27 17:25:56 -07:00
Tim Abbott 4cbe489576 docs: Highlight send messages API in incoming webhooks page.
While we already talk about this in the "overview" section, it appears
some folks skipped that and were confused.
2019-05-20 19:18:30 -07:00
Rishi Gupta d76f728dda api docs: Rename webhook-walkthrough to incoming-webhooks-walkthrough. 2018-10-16 21:07:00 -07:00
Rishi Gupta c3eb922559 api docs: Move general advice to incoming webhooks guide.
One of the bullets does reference APIs, which aren't relevant to incoming
webhooks, but decided to leave it as is.
2018-10-16 21:06:59 -07:00
Rishi Gupta 47cddf4acf api docs: Update incoming-webhooks-overview.md. 2018-10-16 21:06:59 -07:00
Tim Abbott 83bcea3917 api: Fix docs to point to /latest/ for integration docs.
Pointing to /stable/ doesn't work, since that article doesn't exist in
the 1.8.0 release series.
2018-10-10 12:19:14 -07:00
Rishi Gupta bf22eefede api docs: Move integration-docs-guide to docs/. 2018-10-09 20:28:44 -07:00
Eeshan Garg 026493f791 api_docs: Split integration-guide.md into separate docs.
This commit carves out the overview for incoming webhooks and
moves it to its own file. This is a much better way to structure
these docs.

This is a quick follow-up to Tim Abbott's comment on #9592.
2018-07-09 14:59:17 -02:30