🐛 Bug: Two JavaScript labels for filter on Tools page

[Vishv0407]

Describe the bug

On the tools page, on the left side, there is a dropdown for 'Language.' In that dropdown, there are two labels pointing to the same thing: 'JavaScript' and 'Javascript.' The only difference is the capitalization of 's' and 'S.

Steps To Reproduce

1. Go to tools page(https://json-schema.org/tools).
2. Click on 'Language' dropdown.
3. Scroll down to the names starting from letter 'J'.
4. There you can see 'Javascript' and 'Javascript'.

Expected Behavior

There should be only one label 'JavaScript'.

Screenshots

Device Information [optional]

- OS: Ubantu 24.04
- Browser: Firefox
- version: 135.0.1 (64-bit)

Are you working on this issue?

Yes

Do you think this work might require an [Architectural Decision Record (ADR)]? (significant or noteworthy)

Yes

[Vishv0407]

@benjagm @DhairyaMajmudar, can you please assign this issue to me, so I can make a PR?.

[Vishv0407]

Furthermore, I see another similar issue with 'macOS' and 'MacOS'.

here is the screenshot:

[idanidan29]

This issue occurs with TypeScript as well.

[benjagm]

To Fix this we need:

• Correct the data in https://github.com/json-schema-org/website/blob/main/data/tooling-data.yaml and leave just valid values as per the schema.
• Make sure that this github action forces the case sensitive matching when evaluating the json instance against the schema. I am not sure how those occurrences ended up merged. It would be great to find what was the PR merging this and why the github action didn't avoid it.

[Vishv0407]

okay @benjagm, I will make these changes and make a PR soon. Can you please assign this to me?

[benjagm]

go ahead @Vishv0407

[Vishv0407]

Hello @benjagm,

Could you please confirm if I have the correct understanding of the process for adding a tool to the Tools page?

1. Go to the Tools page.
2. Click on "Adding your tool".
3. This opens a new issue using a predefined template, where I need to provide all the necessary details. Once the issue is created, what happens next?

From what I observe, the assignee of the issue manually adds the provided details to the tooling-data.yaml file.

Am I correct in understanding this process?

Thanks!

[DhairyaMajmudar]

Issue will be resolved in PR: #1513

[DhairyaMajmudar]

However their's still left the part suggested in #1443 (comment)

• Make sure that this github action forces the case sensitive matching when evaluating the json instance against the schema. I am not sure how those occurrences ended up merged. It would be great to find what was the PR merging this and why the github action didn't avoid it.

@Vishv0407 pls. have a look into that point.

[Vishv0407]

@DhairyaMajmudar I have proposed my solution idea in #1512(PR). Please review that PR and provide your feedback.

Just to clarify #1513 is only for changing words in tooling-data.yaml which solves this issue #1443.

[DhairyaMajmudar]

Your PR #1513 consists of the same changes that were done in PR #1512, that's why it's no meaning reviewing it again

FYI: https://github.com/json-schema-org/website/pull/1513/files

[Vishv0407]

@DhairyaMajmudar my apologies for confusion. I have added a comment in #1513 for a solution and not changed files as per that, I will wait for your confirmation to add that code in the GitHub workflow.

[DhairyaMajmudar]

No worries @Vishv0407 , it seems like by mistake you committed the code changes to the same PR, it's fine as the PR size is small but take in the future while working with large PR sizes.

What can you do now?

The PR #1513 just requires a minor code change, rest its all done.
As I mentioned here there's still left some work to be done for this issue #1443, for that you can open a separate PR.

[Vishv0407]

@DhairyaMajmudar I have updated the PR #1512 and created a new separate PR #1516 which solving below mentioned point.

• Make sure that this github action forces the case sensitive matching when evaluating the json instance against the schema. I am not sure how those occurrences ended up merged. It would be great to find what was the PR merging this and why the github action didn't avoid it.