Missing docs for autolinking labels

[styfle]

Code of Conduct

• I have read and agree to the GitHub Docs project's Code of Conduct

What article on docs.github.com is affected?

https://docs.github.com/en/get-started/writing-on-github/working-with-advanced-formatting/autolinked-references-and-urls

What part(s) of the article would you like to see updated?

Adding a link to a label will automatically render a short link with the correct label color.

For example, this link

https://github.com/github/docs/labels/content

Renders like this:

content This issue or pull request belongs to the Docs Content team

So there probably needs to be a new section about autolinking labels on that page.

Additional information

No response

[welcome]

Thanks for opening this issue. A GitHub docs team member should be by to give feedback soon. In the meantime, please check out the contributing guidelines.

[TonyGravagno]

It's a shame that #18537 was closed because the suggested remedy was incorrect, though the request was exactly the same as the current one here. The problem was that I was trying to be helpful by suggesting how to solve a problem rather than just stating a problem and leaving it. That's really frustrating.

OK, I'm adding a +1 to support documenting how to autolink labels with a badge, as noted in this ticket. It's good that this is actually a Github-supported feature - the ultimate point is that it's not documented.

However, the solution requires verification/correction.

Yes, this link results in a label/badge:
https://github.com/github/docs/labels/content
content This issue or pull request belongs to the Docs Content team

However, referencing a label in a different repository does not result in the rendering of a badge:
https://github.com/anli5005/STEMFaces/labels/frustration
https://github.com/anli5005/STEMFaces/labels/frustration

So new documentation must be clear that we can only reference a label that exists within the current repo ... if that's actually the rule. There might be other details - we dunno - there's no documentation. LOL

Thanks.

[cmwilson21]

@styfle and @TonyGravagno, thanks for opening an issue and bringing this to our attention. ✨

We are working on an internal PR that will add this information, so I'm going to go ahead and close this issue. You should be able to view the updated docs soon. 👀

Thanks again for your passion in improving the docs! 💛

[TonyGravagno]

Suggestion : As a matter of protocol, please don't close tickets when someone is working on a PR ... Tickets should be Assigned, not Closed. PRs should then be applied to open tickets, verified, then closed. That is, why would anyone work on a task that's already closed? :)

And why should a comment like this be necessary in Github, of all places?

Thanks

[mfisher87]

Sorry to "pile on", but just want to share my experience :) I'm currently searching to try and find these docs to share with others. This issue came up first in my search and I thought: "success! I've found an issue with the same need as me, and it's closed as completed! The answer will surely be here." But there's no link to the new docs and I'm going back to searching :(

[victorlin]

Without any official documentation, it looks like this issue serves as the best place to document features and limitations. Here's another:

Spaces must be replaced with %20. Example: code security Content related to code security