- From: PhistucK <phistuck@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 22:21:25 +0200
- To: Scott Rowe <scottrowe@google.com>
- Cc: Julee Burdekin <julee@adobe.com>, Alex Komoroske <komoroske@google.com>, "public-webplatform@w3.org" <public-webplatform@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CABc02_JLmJdTEzmkFo+o=tuBna+gGfFGiGTjgP9wxNQzsOzQ+g@mail.gmail.com>
So, what is the definitive decision here? I think we need to have one as soon as possible and to get everything organized according to it. Should dom/x only include DOM Level # (Core/Events/Foo)? HTML APIs are, I guess, APIs that are defined within the HTML specification (the WHATWG one? hehe). However, larger concepts (such as canvas, video, audio) would have their own sub namespaces (apis/canvas). And smaller concepts could probably be thrown into the "dom" namespace. So, yeah, I guess an HTML API namespace is not useful here, it would just add confusion and the difference is pretty vague anyway. Regarding JavaScript, I have not found any article for Object, so I guess that should be created. Right? I only see javascript/objects/Date. I see there is a JavaScript Object template. Is there a reason for this distinction? Should we use the API Object template for everything? I have a long list of questions here, I think... everything gets too confusing as you go deeper and deeper. ☆*PhistucK* On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 9:18 PM, Scott Rowe <scottrowe@google.com> wrote: > Hi Julee, > > Thanks for reviewing this. Let's see if I can address your questions... > > 1. Has it ever been clarified if WPD is documenting how JavaScript API >> work in browser instances or if we are documenting APIs regardless of host >> environment or language? (No strong opinion here, just wondering.) >> > > I don't think this has been clarified, and probably should be. My thought > is that wherever possible, we should note any browser-specific > implementations. Most of the time this is handled in the Compatibility > Table Notes section - for example, when a feature requires a flag to be > set. I think the best place for including this is in the general editing > guide. > > >> >> 2. Were do core JavaScript or globals go? >> > > The javascript <http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/javascript> namespace > holds all JavaScript-specific documentation. > > >> >> 3. What about the apis under http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/dom apis? >> > > The dom namespace needs to be reevaluated, too, me thinks. Though this was > not within the scope of this exercise. I hope that the architecture and > methodology we develop for the apis will inform our overhaul of the dom > namespace. > > >> >> 4. Also, kind of following that, instead of /apilist/objects/, why not >> associate with the dom? So: >> >> /apis/document/properties/cookie >> /apis/window/storage/localStorage/methods/ >> /apis/window/indexedDB/methods/ >> /apis/window/File/methods/ >> > > We're keeping the dom namespace separate from the apis namespace, as I > understand it. I think the non-dom apis are more clearly defined on their > own, and that fitting them within the dom does not add any value. While it > is true that most of the time the API is accessed within the context of a > dom object, i.e. navigator.getUserMedia() and window.indexedDB.open(), > usually this context is only necessary to create the initial object, i.e. a > LocalMediaStream object or an IDBOpenDBRequest object. That much is > adequately covered in the documentation and needn't be spelled out in the > URLs. > > >> >> 5. Would it be useful to have dom, bom, cssom, svgom? Or is that a >> hairball... >> > > Again, I would treat those as separate namespaces and their organization > as a separate exercise. That said, we do have some cssom stuff. See the Category:CSS > page <http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/Category:CSS>. > > >> >> 6. If we put all of the APIs under /apis/, we also have this page: >> /html/apis. This will continue to be the list all of the HTML API that >> reside under /apis/? Not sure how meaningful that list is. For example, it >> has getUserMedia(), but not the MediaStream object. Maybe, instead, we >> could have concept pages, such as media_capture_and_stream or >> client_storage, where you could list all of the relevant API? >> > > I don't think the html/apis page<http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/html/apis> is > useful, and it's probably a mistake. It has only one link that refers to > the File API as apis/file <http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/apis/file>. > All of the other labels in the list (they are not linked) also refer to > APIs that belong to the apis namespace, and none of these is an HTML API as > I understand it. What is an HTML API anyway? > > >> >> 7. Topic_hierarchy still has apis under topic areas and architecture is >> out of date. Can we review these and confirm current location or provide >> location of move? >> > > Yes, we need to update both the WPD:Architecture<http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Architecture>and > WPD:Content/Topic_Hierarchy<http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Content/Topic_Hierarchy>pages. These could be better organized, too. In fact, I'd like to revisit > the entire WPD: namespace, but that's a separate project. > > >> >> 8. Where do the images or other files associated with the page reside? >> > > The usual treatment: any images or files may be attached to the page. The > wiki stores all images in a database and refers to them by id. > > >> >> Thanks! >> >> Julee >> >> > Thanks to you, Julee! > +Scott > > >> >> >> >> >> From: Scott Rowe <scottrowe@google.com> >> Date: Thursday, November 8, 2012 11:25 PM >> To: Alex Komoroske <komoroske@google.com> >> Cc: "public-webplatform@w3.org" <public-webplatform@w3.org> >> Subject: Re: Creating API pages >> >> >> Thank you frozenice and Alex for nailing that bug! >> Earlier Alex had asked for a summary of the methodology and architecture >> proposed. I appreciate the need for greater clarity. >> >> == Problem == >> >> Contributors and users cannot create and locate pages in the apis >> namespace because the namespace architecture is inadequate to the task. >> The architecture has the following problems: >> >> * Does not differentiate between an API¹s common name (WebRTC) and the >> actual JavaScript objects that provide the programmatic API (MediaStream). >> More... >> < >> http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Creating_API_pages#No_differentiation >> _between_objects_and_listings> >> >> * Inaccurately describes the relationship between the API objects and >> their members - events, methods, and properties (by omitting the object >> identifier or using the wrong casing on it). More... >> < >> http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Creating_API_pages#Delineation_is_ina >> ccurate> >> >> * Does not provide for duplicate member names of the same member type, for >> example two properties named label, each a property of a different object. >> More... >> < >> http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Creating_API_pages#Dublicate_names_in >> _conflict> >> >> Problems with forms and templates are somewhat related to the problems >> with the architecture. Various fixes to these are needed to round out the >> larger solution for usability. More... >> < >> http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Creating_API_pages#Template_and_form_ >> fixes_needed> >> >> == Solution == >> >> A methodology for creating new content is part of the solution. >> >> * For each common-name API, create only one API Listing page as a top >> level page for the API; follow casing rules; include any other common >> names for the API in the page content; consistently follow the >> methodology, even for singleton APIs. More... >> <http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Creating_API_pages#Listing_page> >> >> * Introduce a new namespace identifier, objects and locate all api object >> pages under it. More... >> < >> http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Creating_API_pages#Stubbing_out_the_p >> ages> >> >> Also, a new architecture is needed. >> >> * The proposed new architecture is as follows: >> >> apis >> apis/apilist >> apis/apilist/objects/apiObject/events >> apis/apilist/objects/apiObject/methods >> apis/apilist/objects/apiObject/properties >> >> More clarity about how to create the pages is required. >> >> * Provide guidelines to creating URLs for API pages in the WPD:New_Page >> <http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:New_Page> page. >> >> * Develop the forms and templates used in creating new apis pages. TODO¹s >> in this section >> < >> http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Creating_API_pages#Filling_in_the_pag >> es> >> >> Implied with this methodology is the need to reorganize the existing >> content according to the new model. >> >> +Scott >> >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Alex Komoroske <komoroske@google.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Scott Rowe <scottrowe@google.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Alex, >> When I visit the page, apis/indexedDB/properties/direction >> <http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/apis/indexedDB/properties/direction>, >> no >> text (like "Property of apis/indexedDB/IDBCursor") appears on the page. >> Nor does such text appear on the other properties pages of IDBCursor, even >> though all of these pages do have "apis/indexedDB/IDBCursor" in the >> Applies_to field. >> >> >> >> >> >> That was an odd bug. I just fixed it (although I'm not entirely sure how; >> the change I made should have netted to a no-op). >> >> >> The methods pages of IDBCursor, such as apis/indexedDB/methods/advance >> <http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/apis/indexedDB/methods/advance> do have >> the text. >> >> There is a bug somewhere. This is not a caching problem. I'll continue to >> look into it. I appreciate your advice. >> >> +Scott >> >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Alex Komoroske <komoroske@google.com> >> wrote: >> >> Hi Scott, >> Thanks for writing this up! >> >> The organization is confusing me a bit since it bounces back and forth >> between between critiquing the current setup, proposing changes, and >> describing how to practically accomplish things in the current set-up (I >> think? It may describe how to accomplish things in the hypothetical >> future). Is there a crisp summary of the changes you propose? >> >> Also, note that your point about the Applies_to field not working for >> things like apis/indexedDB/IDBCursor is incorrect--it was actually just a >> caching problem. After you update the applies_to field, you often need to >> do a hard refresh (Edit > Refresh from within the page) of the page where >> you want it to show up. We should document this somewhere, perhaps next >> to the Applies_to field itself. >> >> --Alex >> >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 12:03 PM, Scott Rowe <scottrowe@google.com> wrote: >> >> When I sat down to document the process for creating API pages, using the >> WebRTC documentation as the poster child, I found more questions than >> answers. I realized that we did not have a good story here, so I did my >> best to fill in the holes with a methodology that attempts to solve the >> problems I found. >> You find this methodology described in WPD:Creating_API_pages >> <http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Creating_API_pages>. >> >> Note that it started out as a how-to for contributors, but quickly became >> a proposal. So parts of it will read either way. Don't be alarmed. The >> purpose of the document is to provide you with a methodology to try on as >> you do what I did - test it out with your own API pages. >> >> As you do, please don't update the methodology in that page - let's >> discuss it first. We can use this thread for the discussion. >> >> Thanks for your help! >> >> +Scott >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
Received on Friday, 9 November 2012 20:22:51 UTC