readme: Unclear reference to devtools protocol viewer

[Chealer]

The readme file’s introduction contains:

More: DevTools Protocol repo and published devtools protocol viewer

The second link is unclear, since its target does not refer to a viewer.

---

This is a follow-up to issues #219 and #221. Note that I do not master the CDP.

This report (including all messages and attachments I add to it) is offered under the terms of CC0 1.0.

[OrKoN]

The second link is to https://chromedevtools.github.io/devtools-protocol/ which is the published website of this repository.

[Chealer]

OK, but it does not even contain the word "viewer". Are you saying that "devtools protocol viewer" is not a viewer?🤔

[OrKoN]

Why should it contain the word "viewer"? This repository is called debugger-protocol-viewer (arguably it could have been named better) and https://chromedevtools.github.io/devtools-protocol/ is where this "viewer" is deployed to and it allows you to view the protocol definitions. What would you suggest to change the link title to?

[Chealer]

Thank you for the followup @OrKoN

Why should it contain the word "viewer"?

I am not saying it should necessarily, but the label should be coherent with its target; either the label should not indicate it links to a viewer, or the target should be a viewer.

This repository is called debugger-protocol-viewer (arguably it could have been named better) and https://chromedevtools.github.io/devtools-protocol/ is where this "viewer" is deployed to and it allows you to view the protocol definitions. What would you suggest to change the link title to?

I think I see. Is it possible that in "devtools protocol viewer", "viewer" means "documentation", or "documentation website"?

[OrKoN]

Yeah, ideally, this repo is renamed to "devtools-protocol-website" or something like that but I guess we can rename the link right now.

[Chealer]

Thank you very much @OrKoN , that commit seems to fix. In computer science, a "viewer" is typically an application to view things. For example, Microsoft Photos and Gwenview are image viewers. As the CDP website is not an application, calling it a viewer is confusing.

If I understand the situation correctly, I would recommend changing:

Website for viewing Chrome DevTools Protocol defined at https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:third_party/blink/public/devtools_protocol/.

…to:

Website documenting Chrome DevTools Protocol defined at https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:third_party/blink/public/devtools_protocol/.

[OrKoN]

The web site does not document the protocol, the documentation is part of the PDL file that define the protocol. The repo is basically a web application to view the pdl file and it being a static web site is just an implementation detail. It also adds interactive features such as search over the PDL file content.

[Chealer]

Aah, thanks again @OrKoN, I think I see now. I agree that this repository does not define/specify the protocol, but it still documents part of the protocol and some of its implementation. Even if most of the documentation is not in the repository, it seems it contains the top-level documentation. If I understand correctly, I would suggest something like:

This repository implements the main website of the Chrome DevTools Protocol defined at https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:third_party/blink/public/devtools_protocol/ and a viewer for the PDL file which defines the protocol.

[Chealer]

Thank you for that solution @OrKoN
By the way, since most websites are published, I would drop the adjective "published", which may create confusion. If its role is to distinguish from a different website about CDP which is private, then it should read "public".