Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

docs: improve gatsby-plugin-offline SSR seo #20566

Merged

Conversation

wardpeet
Copy link
Contributor

Description

We get a lot of questions about view-source not working 100% correctly when using gatsby-plugin-offline as we ship a reduced payload to our users.

I've tried to improve these docs based on this issue
#20235

Related Issues

#20235

@wardpeet wardpeet requested a review from a team as a code owner January 13, 2020 09:40
@wardpeet wardpeet added the type: documentation An issue or pull request for improving or updating Gatsby's documentation label Jan 13, 2020
docs/docs/seo.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@laurieontech laurieontech left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for this Ward! Awesome to have further context on this in the docs. I want to get a second set of eyes to make sure this explanation clicks for more than just me. Other than that made some small edits.

packages/gatsby-plugin-offline/README.md Show resolved Hide resolved
docs/docs/seo.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
docs/docs/seo.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@laurieontech
Copy link
Contributor

Looks great! Thanks Ward.

@laurieontech laurieontech merged commit dbe0a14 into gatsbyjs:master Jan 14, 2020
@wardpeet wardpeet deleted the docs/better-seo-explanation-offline branch January 14, 2020 17:52
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
type: documentation An issue or pull request for improving or updating Gatsby's documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants