Cnames data format about js.org HOT 4 CLOSED

The comment could be simply another column that might be empty. For example, the first few entries in the current table might be entered like this:

*.js.org,.github.io,no CF?
,js-org.github.io,
100dayz,deadcoder0904.github.io/100dayz,
101,7anshuai.github.io/js101,*

which would result in:

from js.org.

thats a goog idea, with the drawback that CSV doesn´t allow comments on GitHub. Will have to think about.

from js.org.

I would prefer JSON.

from js.org.

When I mentioned comments I was thinking about the block comments at the beginnig and now also in the end:

/*
* please don't add your subdomain records down here!
* insert them in alphabetical order to help reduce merge conflicts.
* <3
*/

When I process the pull requests it seems to me that half of the requester haven't even read a single line of the "readme". By switching to CSV and seperating them into another file or the wiki I would imagine it will get worse and will result in less accurate PRs and more work for me.
Also I only see one clear benefit of CSV over JS (or JSON) - and that is a nicer display of the full list. As soon as you want to edit the CSV (e.g. to add a new record) on GitHub or on in your local editor that benefit is completely gone. And with a 3rd column, the readability of CSV is even a bit worse in my oppinion.

Using a JavaScript file also seems the natural choise to me for JS.ORG 😀

Its hard for me to overlook all the thumbs-up for CSV 😔 so I hope you are not mad at me when I just keep it as it is for my very own delight.

from js.org.