- From: Alex Komoroske <komoroske@google.com>
- Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 11:39:11 +1100
- To: Scott Rowe <scottrowe@google.com>
- Cc: "public-webplatform@w3.org" <public-webplatform@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAPwaZpXApi0Wu0-qHrFxOPm5YFcy8ZGa31aETPzaPHM3eQd0Zw@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 5:08 AM, Scott Rowe <scottrowe@google.com> wrote: > For the Template Corps, I would like to propose the following changes. I'd > also like to do these changes myself - as a learning exercise - with the > guidance of a TC member, and I'm sure there are others who would like to > learn to do these. If a member is planning on attending the Doc Sprint in > Mountain View next week, that would give us the opportunity to hold a small > session in which we could use these changes as learning exercises. > Unfortunately I won't be at the doc sprint next week, but I'd be happy to work through this with you one of the other days next week. > > *Concepts listing template* > > We need a concepts listing template, like an API listing page, but without > the dependency on the API listing form. Consider the concepts/mobile_web<http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/concepts/mobile_web> page > where someone simply included the API_Listing template call over the extant > basic page - which is innovative, to be sure, but not a neat solution. It > causes more than one default form to be defined for the page, and the > listing table to be displayed first, before the main content. > > A "Concepts_Listing" template could be dropped on any basic or concepts > page and create the same Page/Summary table as that for API listings. It > would "Use page title instead of API_Name" - which currently doesn't seem > to be working, by the way. > This makes a lot of sense, especially since people are already using it this way. The actual table should be some template, and the API_Listing page template should be re-implemented to primarily just use precisely that template.Also, we'll need to think about where and how we handle the form part of the table. It's probably best to define a Concept_Listing_Form_Section template and use that in any form that needs a concept listing. Incidentally, Template:Single_Example, Template:Inline_Example, and Template:Examples_Section collectively follow this basic pattern where the "heavy lifting" is done by an inner template. > > *API_Listing changes* > > Speaking of API_Listing, I'd like to make these more capable of including > overview content as well as listing their API_Object sub pages the same way > API_Object pages list API_Object_Properties, _Methods, and _Events. > > Currently, the API_Listing pages present the Summary, followed by the > listing table, which can either be query-based or sub page-based. See the > apis/webrtc <http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/apis/webrtc> page for an > example. > > I'd like to make it so that the page first provides a Main Content section > - to allow for an elaborate description (the example is using the Usage > section of the Notes form). The Main Content section would appear after the > Summary. > This change sounds reasonable to me (again, on the API_Listing page template, not the Concept_listing *inner *template discussed above). > > > Following the Main Content, the page would display a listing table of > Objects using the same mechanism that the API_Object page uses to pull > together tables of Properties, Methods, and Events - with the "Applies to" > field of those pages. This Object/Summary table could replace the > query-based or sub page-based table, or we could allow for that table to > appear at the end of the page (which would require moving it down in the > form). > I don't think this is a good idea. The Applies_to machinery is very specifically suited to members of an interface, where each member is part of one interface. The API_Listing pages allow more rich queries that permit you to have a single leaf page easily show up in multiple category listings without the leaf page having to know anything about where else it's being included. > > *API_Object changes* > > Like listing pages, the API_Object pages need a Main Content section to > provide an explanation about using the object. This would appear after the > Summary section, and it would be followed by the Examples section. So, all > of this would have to be reordered. > Sounds reasonable. We should make sure the naming of this section is consistent across its uses in API_Listing, API_Object, etc. Main_Content sounds reasonable, I think. > > Also, per the above, the API_Object page would need an "Applies to" field > that would allow the API_Listing page to pull the API_Object page Name and > Summary into a table on the API_Listing page. > > What do you think? > > +Scott > >
Received on Thursday, 6 December 2012 00:40:01 UTC