[docs] Mark required props in API docs

[ZeeshanTamboli]

• I have followed (at least) the PR section of the contributing guide.

Closes #1694 (See #1694 (comment))

Preview:

• Radio.Root - https://deploy-preview-1756--base-ui.netlify.app/react/components/radio#root
• Menu.RadioItem - https://deploy-preview-1756--base-ui.netlify.app/react/components/menu#radio-item

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for base-ui ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	4accd31
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/base-ui/deploys/680a33ba34799800088f6430
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-1756--base-ui.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

[colmtuite]

Why does this need to be documented? It becomes clear pretty quickly in the IDE, no? I'm not a fan of adding superfluous content to the actual prop name in the docs, it could be misleading.

[ZeeshanTamboli]

Why does this need to be documented? It becomes clear pretty quickly in the IDE, no? I'm not a fan of adding superfluous content to the actual prop name in the docs, it could be misleading.

Then why document any props at all if they're visible in the IDE? Also, did you see this comment? #1694 (comment)

[colmtuite]

Well because not all props are equal in this regard. I'm not saying nothing should change here, I'm just saying that making the prop names inaccurate in the table is not the right solution.

[ZeeshanTamboli]

I'm just saying that making the prop names inaccurate in the table is not the right solution.

I assume you're referring to the asterisk after the prop names. From what I've seen, it's a common convention — for example:

• Material UI: children prop is marked as required.
• Mantine UI: Props table uses a similar approach.

Do you have a different suggestion in mind?

[atomiks]

I think the asterisk is ok but it needs to be in a <sup>, maybe red too (Mantine does this at least). This matches the common convention of required fields in forms all over the web. The * on the same level as the prop name looks a bit odd

[ZeeshanTamboli]

I think the asterisk is ok but it needs to be in a <sup>, maybe red too (Mantine does this at least). This matches the common convention of required fields in forms all over the web. The * on the same level as the prop name looks a bit odd

@atomiks Made the changes.

[atomiks]

This change looks fine to me 👍

cc: @colmtuite @mnajdova @michaldudak

Perhaps title="required" or something else is required for screen readers.