AWS appsync documentation change
Summary
Updated image captions and alt text throughout the AppSync CDK guide to improve clarity and specificity
Security assessment
Changes are purely descriptive improvements to image references without any mention of security vulnerabilities, access controls, or security features. Modifications focus on UI elements and deployment outputs without security implications.
Diff
diff --git a/appsync/latest/devguide/using-your-api.md b/appsync/latest/devguide/using-your-api.md index cf32592ce..4186ef2db 100644 --- a//appsync/latest/devguide/using-your-api.md +++ b//appsync/latest/devguide/using-your-api.md @@ -45 +45 @@ When you do this, a CDK app along with its initialization files will be installe - + @@ -49 +49 @@ Your project structure may look like this: - + @@ -112 +112 @@ Bootstrap will spin up several resources. The final message will look like this: - + @@ -118 +118 @@ The Amazon S3 bucket is used to store files and IAM roles that grant permissions - + @@ -122 +122 @@ The same can be said for the bucket: - + @@ -148 +148 @@ In our example, we included a top-level directory called `schema` containing our - + @@ -230 +230 @@ This is the result: - + @@ -234 +234 @@ It appears our example was successful, but let's check the AWS AppSync console j - + @@ -238 +238 @@ It appears our API was created. Now, we'll check the schema attached to the API: - + @@ -242 +242 @@ This appears to match up with our schema code, so it was successful. Another way - + @@ -246 +246 @@ When we deploy our CDK app, it goes through CloudFormation to spin up resources - + @@ -294 +294 @@ We should check the DynamoDB console for our new table: - + @@ -298 +298 @@ Our stack name is correct, and the table name matches our code. If we check our - + @@ -422 +422 @@ Let's check the AWS AppSync console to see if they were attached to our GraphQL - + @@ -428 +428 @@ Let's see if the content of the resolvers is correct starting with the `pipeline - + @@ -434 +434 @@ Let's look at the code content of that function: - + @@ -438 +438 @@ This matches up with the `code` props of the `add_posts_func_1` function. Our qu - + @@ -442 +442 @@ These also match the code. If we look at `get_posts_func_1`: - + @@ -446 +446 @@ Everything appears to be in place. To confirm this from a metadata perspective, - + @@ -454 +454 @@ To test our app in the AWS AppSync console, we made one query and one mutation: - + @@ -471 +471 @@ If we check the DynamoDB table quickly, we can see our entry in the table when w - +