https://github.com/openshift/openshift-docs/pull/26265#discussion_r516260507

JStickler 2 days ago Member
While we've presented this information in tables before, I'm not sure this particular organization works very well. I think I'd have a really hard time turning these tables into a properly formatted and nested YAML file. I think it might be better to do something like we did in V1, where we had a table for each chunk of the configuration file (gateways, policy, telemetry, runtime, addons). (if we don't have time before the release, then we should definitely do it ASAP after the release.)

@neal-timpe neal-timpe yesterday Author Member
I'm not sure how effective these tables are as configuration documentation. I think that they're recreations of api docs that are better hosted elsewhere.

I think we should be writing configuration docs in the user guide rather than these tables. I think we should talk to @heathjoy about where we add that content.

@rcernich rcernich 23 hours ago Member
Whatever you decide is fine by me. I've attempted a start at a table-ized version of api docs here, although they are very rough and need to be regenerated and merged into istio-operator.

@heathjoy heathjoy 5 hours ago
@neal-timpe let's look at this right after the release. If we have a lot of tables that make up config topics, then I agree that they should be in a guide and xref'd as appropriate.