Is this example appropriate? (19.6)

[kimhanui]

First of all, thx for open this convention!

LINK : https://github.com/ParkSB/javascript-style-guide#whitespace--chains
Here is the examples of convention 19.6 and I have no idea of how the final good example is an improvement of bad one.

What does it mean?
Why some chainings were cut off?

// bad
const leds = stage.selectAll('.led').data(data).enter().append('svg:svg').classed('led', true)
    .attr('width', (radius + margin) * 2).append('svg:g')
    .attr('transform', `translate(${radius + margin},${radius + margin})`)
    .call(tron.led);

// good
const leds = stage.selectAll('.led')
    .data(data)
  .enter().append('svg:svg')
    .classed('led', true)
    .attr('width', (radius + margin) * 2)
  .append('svg:g')
    .attr('transform', `translate(${radius + margin},${radius + margin})`)
    .call(tron.led);

// good
const leds = stage.selectAll('.led').data(data); //<- what does it mean?

[ljharb]

yes, you're right - it's probably supposed to be:

// good
const leds = stage.selectAll('.led').data(data);
const svg = leds.enter().append('svg:svg');
svg.classed('led', true).attr(width', (radius + margin) * 2);
const g = svg.append('svg:g');
g.attr('transform', `translate(${radius + margin},${radius + margin})`).call(tron.led);

(added in #730)