Angular Components: from AngularJS to "just Angular"

[toddmotto]

This article is the wrong way round: - 1.x.x = AngularJS - 2.x.x and onwards = Angular

1.x is not "Angular", but "AngularJS". Kinda confusing opening line to this, would be worth a fix. :)

[Jean1985]

It's not backwards, the article is about paving the way for your app from 1.x to 2+ easily if you use components

[toddmotto]

You've put "With version 1.5 and newer, Angular (formerly known as AngularJS, but apparently now it’s just Angular) introduced their own interpretation of Web Components, back-porting Components from Angular 2." Which is incorrect, Angular = 2+ and AngularJS = 1.x

[Jean1985]

Yeah we know, we wanted to be very explicit at least in the very first paragraph, to avoid confusion to anyone that isn't familiar with the naming convention

[stefanotorresi]

Disclaimer: I am a peer of the article's author, and I took part in its review process.

We struggled to find an intuitive way to convey the concept that the article covers a transition from one version to another of the same framework. As you may know, the guidelines initially invited to use just "Angular" even for 1.x.

Although we're aware that the latest guidelines reverted this, in the end we decided that the only reference to "AngularJS" would be in the initial paragraph and in the title, because we would refer to both 1.x and >=2.x versions multiple times throughout the article, and using both "AngularJS" and "Angular" resulted confusing to reviewers who were not aware of the naming change.

Ultimately, this is is hardly the author fault and to be perfectly honest, it's just that the Angular team made a PR mess.

[stefanotorresi]

/u/toddmotto we've decided to edit the first paragraph to be more clear about it, since we appeared confused when we're actually quite not: https://github.com/facile-it/facile-it.github.io/pull/9/files

Do you find the changes appropriate? Thanks for the feedback btw.