Mismatch in documentation

[glatavento]

At the beginning of this page, the field used to represent author is book.author (requires a string)

mdBook/guide/src/format/configuration/general.md

Lines 7 to 14 in bf258ee

	```toml
	[book]
	title = "Example book"
	author = "John Doe"
	description = "The example book covers examples."
	[rust]
	edition = "2018"

but then changed to book.authors (requires a list):

mdBook/guide/src/format/configuration/general.md

Lines 37 to 43 in bf258ee

	### General metadata
	This is general information about your book.
	- **title:** The title of the book
	- **authors:** The author(s) of the book
	- **description:** A description for the book, which is added as meta

and it should be the latter one, according to the config parser

mdBook/src/config.rs

Lines 403 to 420 in 981b79b

	/// Configuration options which are specific to the book and required for
	/// loading it from disk.
	#[derive(Debug, Clone, PartialEq, Serialize, Deserialize)]
	#[serde(default, rename_all = "kebab-case")]
	pub struct BookConfig {
	/// The book's title.
	pub title: Option<String>,
	/// The book's authors.
	pub authors: Vec<String>,
	/// An optional description for the book.
	pub description: Option<String>,
	/// Location of the book source relative to the book's root directory.
	pub src: PathBuf,
	/// Does this book support more than one language?
	pub multilingual: bool,
	/// The main language of the book.
	pub language: Option<String>,
	}

(please point out if I have misunderstood)

[ehuss]

Oops, good catch! Yea, the docs should be authors plural.

[glatavento]

Or maybe it would be easier to modify the parser...? There are already many books using the singular form author, see

https://github.com/rust-lang/book/blob/d9415b7cbfcb4b24062683f429bd0ff535396362/book.toml#L1-L3

https://github.com/rust-lang/rustc-dev-guide/blob/0c02acdb6f48f03907a02ea8e537c3272b4fde9f/book.toml#L1-L3

https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-by-example/blob/e9f93cfcf410bc092c9107b8a41a82f144c761f2/book.toml#L1-L4

[ehuss]

Oh my! I wonder how that division happened. I would prefer to keep only a single field, and authors seems reasonable to me. Mdbook doesn't even use the field for anything, so it's probably not too important. If #1595 is addressed, then that should handle any warnings for unknown fields.

[FauconFan]

@rustbot claim

[kg4zow]

Maybe leave them both in there, with author allowing a single string and authors taking an array of strings? And if both happen to be present, add the author value to the authors array before returning from the parser function?

... wow, it looks like you did the merge while I was typing this. 😁