docs(versioning): update docs to include landmark roles

[joshblack]

Add a section to our versioning docs to include landmark roles as they relate to semver.

Feedback

Would love to hear what you all think about this section and if it accurately captures our semver policy 👀 Let me know if there is anything missing or anything that needs to be changed!

[changeset-bot]

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: 49ed88b

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

[github-actions]

size-limit report 📦

Path	Size
dist/browser.esm.js	100.7 KB (0%)
dist/browser.umd.js	101.29 KB (0%)

[broccolinisoup]

I love this 🔥 My only feedback/question is that should we elaborate what we mean by "potentially major" under the semver section? 👀

[TylerJDev]

Looks great! ✨

Off-topic, but it might be worth a discussion in the future to see if we should steer clear from having default landmarks all together in components and always give that choice to the consumer? This doesn't seem to be the norm in newer components, but I do see the friction that could be caused through updates such as with PageLayout and others. I really like the approach done in the fix #3737 and I wonder if it could be applied elsewhere 🤔

[iansan5653]

Awesome, thank you!

[joshblack]

@TylerJDev totally agreed, I think you're dead-on that we probably shouldn't be baking in default landmark roles. Let me see where would a good place be to capture that so that we consider it in future component work 👀 (or let me know if you have any places in mind where it may be good to capture this!)