feat: Editorial review for Shared Storage API docs

[chrisdavidmills]

Description

#28051 contains the engineering technical review for my work on the Shared Storage API docs, which has been completed and approved. Thank you to @pythagoraskitty for your thorough and detailed review work.

This is a new PR based on the same branch, which is intended to contain the editorial review for the same work.

---

Background information

The Shared Storage API is an integral part of Google's privacy sandbox technologies. Many parts of this set are being made available by default in Chrome 117 (depending on a gradual ramp-up to 100% of userbase over the 117 release period).

This PR adds content for Shared Storage. See my research document for information on exactly what features are being added.

Motivation

Additional details

Related issues and pull requests

[chrisdavidmills]

• All occurrences of this link need to be updated (storage --> Storage)
  [Shared Storage API](/en-US/docs/Web/API/Shared_storage_API)

• Also, if you're updating key/value pairs, you might want to check all occurrences (key/value pairs --> key-value pairs)

@dipikabh I've done both of these. For the second one, I've made sure the key/value --> key-value change has been made everywhere, but just in the shared storage api docs. Looking at the rest of MDN, it looks like key/value is still used everywhere. Are the changes made in this PR part of a larger effort to standardize on key-value everywhere?

[dipikabh]

I've done both of these.

Thank you!

it looks like key/value is still used everywhere. Are the changes made in this PR part of a larger effort to standardize on key-value everywhere?

That's an interesting question. I came across key/value in this PR. My preference leans towards key-value and a quick search indicated that the hyphenated form has been used elsewhere, so I was okay to make the suggestion. It appears that both 'key-value' (88) and 'key/value' (96) are in use across our docs. To the best of my knowledge, there is no ongoing effort to standardize this usage.

I'll take a quick look again at the PR shortly and we should be able to get this one through today

[chrisdavidmills]

That's an interesting question. I came across key/value in this PR. My preference leans towards key-value and a quick search indicated that the hyphenated form has been used elsewhere, so I was okay to make the suggestion. It appears that both 'key-value' (88) and 'key/value' (96) are in use across our docs. To the best of my knowledge, there is no ongoing effort to standardize this usage.

Ah, so it is used in other places on the site too! OK, all good then. We should maybe agree on a standard for this one day, but it doesn't have to be today.

I'll take a quick look again at the PR shortly and we should be able to get this one through today

Lovely, cheers!

[dipikabh]

Hi @chrisdavidmills, thanks for the updates and addressing all the suggestions.

I like that you quote your edited text if it is different from the suggestion. It helps me quickly go through any outstanding changes I should look at. I've started following this style in my PRs as well 🙂.

I'm leaving a +1 here, but I'll leave it for you to merge in case you want to update the text for these two comments:
#30427 (comment)
#30427 (comment)

[chrisdavidmills]

I like that you quote your edited text if it is different from the suggestion. It helps me quickly go through any outstanding changes I should look at. I've started following this style in my PRs as well 🙂.

@dipikabh I've only recently started doing that as well; pretty useful huh.

I've addressed the further couple of minor changes you suggested, and now I think we're ready to merge. Thanks so much for the detailed review!