Wrong doc for PreviewHeader widget

[Leo Iannacone]

Hi,

in the current doc at https://developer.ubuntu.com/api/scopes/sdk-14.10/previewwidgets/#header

I read:

```
The header widget displays basic infomation about the result.

List of attributes:

title A string specifying the title
subtitle A string specifying the subtitle
mascot A URI specifying the mascot
emblem A URI specifying the emblem
```

Unfortunately, that is wrong... Right now PreviewHeader widget supports only:

```
/*! This preview widget shows a header
 * The title comes in widgetData["title"]
 * The mascot comes in widgetData["mascot"]
 * The subtitle comes in widgetData["subtitle"]
 * The attributes comes in widgetData["attributes"]
 */
```
From the code: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~unity-team/unity8/trunk/view/1621/qml/Dash/Previews/PreviewHeader.qml

ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 15.04
Package: libunity-scopes-doc 0.6.14+15.04.20150213-0ubuntu1
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 3.18.0-13.14-generic 3.18.5
Uname: Linux 3.18.0-13-generic x86_64
ApportVersion: 2.16.1-0ubuntu2
Architecture: amd64
CurrentDesktop: GNOME
Date: Mon Feb 23 17:35:17 2015
Dependencies:

InstallationDate: Installed on 2014-09-18 (157 days ago)
InstallationMedia: Ubuntu-GNOME 14.10 "Utopic Unicorn" - Alpha amd64 (20140917)
PackageArchitecture: all
SourcePackage: unity-scopes-api
SystemImageInfo:
 current build number: 0
 device name:
 channel: daily
 last update: Unknown
UpgradeStatus: Upgraded to vivid on 2015-01-23 (31 days ago)

[Michi Henning (michihenning)]

Not clear to me whether this is a bug in the scopes API doc, or a bug in the shell. Saviq, which one do you think?

[Albert Astals Cid (aacid)]

It's both :)

It's a bug in the documentation because we don't support it, and we shouldn't be telling people they can use stuff we don't implement

It's a bug in unity8 because it should support it ( already exists at https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity8/+bug/1424720 )

[Michi Henning (michihenning)]

OK, I think I'll close this then as "not a bug", seeing that the doc correctly describes what should happen.

[Albert Astals Cid (aacid)]

The doc is making people lose their time implementing something that might never be implemented on the unity8 side, fixing it in the doc is probably like 5 seconds time and on unity8 is hours or days, we had someone in the IRC channels that had lost a full afternoon trying to get to get it to work, you really think you investing those 5 seconds to fix it is not worth it?

[Leo Iannacone (l3on)]

Please, consider to reopen this bug.
This kind of issue should be considered seriously in a doc for developers.
Specially for a new framework that is trying to attract even more people day by day.