W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webplatform@w3.org > December 2012

Re: Proposal for updating links on webplatform.org

From: Chris Mills <cmills@opera.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 10:31:19 +0000
Message-Id: <C2878188-3821-447F-A1D9-7AF821F11E3A@opera.com>
To: Janet Swisher <jswisher@mozilla.com>, "public-webplatform@w3.org" <public-webplatform@w3.org>
So i'd imagine the next level to be like this:

Browse by technology - just like http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/TEST:main_page

Browse by tutorials and concepts - like http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/TEST:main_page, but with links to lists of different tutorials and concept docs.
Browser by references - like http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/TEST:main_page, but with links to lists of different reference docs, sorted by technology.

Hmmmm, on writing this, the thought did enter my head that the 2nd and 3rd landing page suggestions here would be VERY similar to  the first one I have already prototyped, except with the tutorial and concept article links removed.

Therefore, this is probably a bit over-engineered and pointless, so perhaps a different solution is in order.

What about improving the search functionality so that people can specify that they want results just from reference, tutorial or concept pages?

OR do we want to completely change tack in terms of how we are doing things, and have:

Two top level menu items:

* Reference
* Concepts and tutorials
* or just "Tutorials"  although I can't help but think some articles won't be tutorials, so this won't be accurate, and I'm not sure separating out tutorials and concepts articles into two separate top level links will work either, as concepts and tutorials are closely linked. A combination of tutorials and concepts working together is really what is best, surely? If we rethink how we want to write the style of our articles, so that all articles that aren't references have some concept parts, but then also have some practical "go away and do this" part as well, could we just call them all tutorials and have done with it?

So we'd end up on the front page with 

Reference										Blog
Tutorials											About (contains brief history, philosophy of webplatform, etc)
Talk to us (contains Q&A, IRC, mailing list info)		?

But if we did this, it would make the main Docs landing page (e.g. http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/TEST:main_page) redundant. We'd then have two landing pages for docs, and it's meaning having to rethink a load of our identity, etc.

So I'm not sure if I want to go down this route.

On 13 Dec 2012, at 21:24, Janet Swisher <jswisher@mozilla.com> wrote:

> In discussing this proposal during the Content Task Force call today, the group wasn't sure how the next level would be organized. We'd like to see how this works at that level, in order to get a better sense of the user's experience.
> On 12/12/12 11:48 AM, Chris Mills wrote:
>> I guess that would be the ideal. So we'll need to have a think about how to provide both capabilities in a seamless way. Would it work to have something like this?
>> Have a top level menu item of "Docs"
>> On hover it comes up with three subitems
>> Docs 
>> |
>> +- Browse by technology
>> |
>> +- Browse tutorials and concepts
>> |
>> +- Browse references
>> If you click Docs or the first option, it brings up the docs page pretty much as we have it now. If you click on the second or third pages, it brings up alternative landing pages  that just cover the tutorials/concepts, or references, laid out in a different way?
>> These would need auto generation so that things stay current and it doesn't become a maintenance nightmare.
>> What do we think? Good? Terrible?
>> On 12 Dec 2012, at 17:26, Eliot Graff 
>> <Eliot.Graff@microsoft.com>
>>  wrote:
>>> I was under the impression--and I think this a good idea--that we were providing both navigational models. Readers can find what they're looking for by technology: go to Canvas and then look for tutorials, reference, etc. for canvas. They can also navigate by content type: go to the tutorials and find tutorials on canvas, appcache, and CSS.
>>> This is what we're striving for, yes?
>>> Eliot
>>>>>> 1. I think it is good to be able to go to one landing page for all
>>>>>> documentation, be it ref or tutorial - docs currently does this. This
>>>>>> immediately fragments the user's navigation decision and makes them
>>>>>> think about what they want in the first instance. "HRM, I want to
>>>>>> learn something about technology X. Do I want reference documents or
>>>>>> tutorials?" versus "I want to learn something, so I'll start off by
>>>>>> going straight to docs." Once they've made a click, they are already
>>>>>> invested in their journey into the site.
>>>>>> 2. I think people are more likely to want to search by technology,
>>>>>> rather than type of documentation, so breaking it up like this in the
>>>>>> first instance is not the best way to go, imo.
>>>>> I see what you're saying. But then why do we separate out reference in
>>>>> the first place? And how do we show the relationship between the two
>>>> sections?
>>>> In the new landing pages I have created, the pages will be separated out first
>>>> by technology, so HTML, CSS, JavaScript, DOM, etc.
>>>> Then on each sublanding page, the pages will be separated out by page types.
>>>> So CSS learning pages (tuts and concepts), CSS property reference, CSS at rule
>>>> reference, etc.
>>>> It is still worth separating out the page types, as each will require different
>>>> info. And there will be relationships forge by the related pages links we are
>>>> planning to add to each page.
>>>> I am now also thinking that it would make sense to have a page just containing
>>>> links to all the tutorials. But then, getting between them would be made
>>>> easier when we have this global WPD navigation menu we have been talking
>>>> about. Whihc is another thing we need to decide upon ;-)
>>> on your doc)
> -- 
> Janet Swisher
> Mozilla Developer Network
> Technical Writer/Community Steward
Received on Friday, 14 December 2012 10:31:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:13:35 UTC