All Pages: Change 'Javascript' to 'JavaScript'

[umairrkhan009]

Updated all instances of "Javascript" to "JavaScript" in content/

---

WAI Preview Link (Last built on Tue, 08 Jul 2025 16:52:35 GMT).

[mcking65]

@howard-e

Could you please investigate reason for failure of Check examples/index.html / coverage (pull_request)?

[howard-e]

Hello @umairrkhan009, thanks for the submission!

Still seeing 8 instances of Javascript with 's' as lowercase when I search the project. 2 of them being required by coverage-report.template, which is causing the build failure.

[css-meeting-bot]

The ARIA Authoring Practices (APG) Task Force just discussed PR 3306: Rename Javascript to JavaScript.

The full IRC log of that discussion

<jugglinmike> Topic: PR 3306: Rename Javascript to JavaScript
<jugglinmike> github: https://github.com//pull/3306
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: This was spun up as a result of a comment in a previous pull request
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: A contributor made a fix for this almost immediately! I included a link in the agenda
<jugglinmike> howard-e: I checked out the error in CI, and I replied to it on the pull request
<jugglinmike> howard-e: The template doesn't have the updated case, but they modified the affected file directly
<jugglinmike> howard-e: I was giving the contributor a chance to update
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: Got it
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: I would like to have someone assigned as a reviewer so that when the change lands, someone can step in and finalize
<jugglinmike> Jem: I volunteer. I assigned to myself
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: Thank you!

[css-meeting-bot]

The ARIA Authoring Practices (APG) Task Force just discussed PR 3306: Rename Javascript to JavaScript.

The full IRC log of that discussion

<jugglinmike> Topic: PR 3306: Rename Javascript to JavaScript
<jugglinmike> github: https://github.com//pull/3306
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: We have a review of this--it's strictly editorial
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: The person who originally submitted this, howard-e reviewed and found some occurrences of the string which were not covered
<jugglinmike> howard-e: Yes, they were outside the content tree. They were in templates
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: We don't have a response from the person who originally created the pull request
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: I think that, because we don't have a publication date set, yet, we can wait a couple weeks
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: We can mention the person on this thread to bump their awareness
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: I think it's okay to let this sit
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: If we don't get a response after that, we can merge it to a feature branch, push a few more changes, and then merge it
<jugglinmike> howard-e: That seems fine to me, as well. I can wait until the end of the week and ping the author again
<jugglinmike> howard-e: the coverage report is failing because the contributor only updated the target file that the template would update, but not the template itself
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: So as soon as the source is updated (in the content/shared/template directory), then that will be good
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: And that's not a WAI template, that's our own template
<jugglinmike> howard-e: That's right
<jugglinmike> Jem: And eventually, are we going to move those templates into WAI?
<jugglinmike> Matt_King: No, because those templates are not design templates--they're content templates
<jugglinmike> Jem: Got it

[umairrkhan009]

Thanks for the review and discussion! I saw the IRC notes—apologies for missing the template files. I'll make the necessary updates in the content/shared/template/ directory and push the changes shortly. Let me know if there's anything else I should look at.

[a11ydoer]

We appreciate you raising the issue and the updating the PR, @umairrkhan009

[nschonni]

Might make sense to add the preference to the cSpell config https://cspell.org/docs/forbidden-words