- From: Scott Rowe <scottrowe@google.com>
- Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 09:47:33 -0700
- To: Mike Sierra <letmespellitoutforyou@gmail.com>
- Cc: Julee Burdekin <jburdeki@adobe.com>, Eliot Graff <Eliot.Graff@microsoft.com>, Jonathan Garbee <jonathan.garbee@gmail.com>, WebPlatform Public List <public-webplatform@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAHZLcPrXyMEF_+yHBGYAHRx78S29j=gsDy-rhxzmmrJSfdtkiA@mail.gmail.com>
Thanks folks, I've updated the form with Julie's edits. ~Scott On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Mike Sierra < letmespellitoutforyou@gmail.com> wrote: > Was actually confused that examples seemed to be as fixed a requirement > for concepts as they are for properties. Some, like css/concepts/inherited, > seem naturally simple enough to express in a short paragraph. Or perhaps > this is the proper role of the "Glossary" template? Turned > out css/concepts/overset was complex enough to benefit from several > examples. > > I authored most of the css/concepts content as needed for click-thru's for > property-page templates & for CSS Regions, so I realize I'm to blame here. > (BUGS: there are no links to existing "animatable" and "applies to" > concepts. Also no "media" concept, and click-thrus such as "visual" don't > resolve.) > > Also confused that some concept pages were marked as needing examples & > some weren't (e.g. css/concepts/region, /region_chain, /named_flow, > /fragment). > > --Mike S > > > > On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Julee Burdekin <jburdeki@adobe.com>wrote: > >> Thanks, everyone. OK. I'm thinking that this UI is confusing. Mike Sierra >> thought it meant that you should not add an example unless you emailed the >> community. >> >> Maybe the note should say something more direct to the editor, such as: >> "This article does not need an example. (This box should be checked only in >> rare cases. Most articles need examples.)" ? >> >> J >> ---------------------------- >> julee@adobe.com >> @adobejulee >> >> From: Scott Rowe <scottrowe@google.com> >> Date: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 8:35 AM >> To: Eliot Graff <Eliot.Graff@microsoft.com> >> Cc: Jonathan Garbee <jonathan.garbee@gmail.com>, WebPlatform Public List >> <public-webplatform@w3.org> >> >> Subject: Re: Message "Do not check this box without first reviewing with >> the community on the e-mail list." >> Resent-From: WebPlatform Public List <public-webplatform@w3.org> >> Resent-Date: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 8:36 AM >> >> >> The examples checkbox tells us whether or not to include the article in >> the results of a query for articles needing examples. If the article should >> have an example, and the checkbox is not checked, then the article will >> display the "Needs Examples" flag and it will be listed in the results of a >> query for articles needing examples, like those in the Getting Started page >> ( >> http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Getting_Started#Develop_code_examples >> ). >> >> This is essential information that helps guide contributors who want to >> develop code examples. As to whether it belongs in a conceptual article, >> that is up to the beholder: if you think a conceptual article needs an >> example, go ahead and leave the box unchecked. >> >> ~Scott >> >> >> >> On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Eliot Graff <Eliot.Graff@microsoft.com>wrote: >> >>> My guess is that the logic for this comes from when Alex et al were >>> developing the templates. I would imagine that Alex and Chris Mills would >>> be the best bet for understanding the historical reasons behind it, though >>> like you, I cannot fathom why we’d suppress samples on a page like this. >>> **** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> *From:* Jonathan Garbee [mailto:jonathan.garbee@gmail.com] >>> *Sent:* Monday, August 12, 2013 2:21 PM >>> *To:* WebPlatform Public List >>> *Subject:* Re: Message "Do not check this box without first reviewing >>> with the community on the e-mail list."**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> It looks to me as if this checkbox is supposed to make it so the example >>> isn't shown on the page. However that seems counter-productive and useless. >>> **** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> In some cases concepts should have code examples. It is perfectly valid >>> for them to be there.**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> So, if this isn't what the checkbox does then what does it do? And >>> further why would a warning like this be put on something without >>> consulting the ML first? (Unless it is just a discussion I couldn't find, >>> in which case a link to the discussion of it after the warning would be >>> nice.)**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 4:49 PM, Julee <julee@adobe.com> wrote:**** >>> >>> Hi, folks:**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> When editing a concept page,[1] I can across this note:**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> Examples Section**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> *Not required (suppresses printing of the entire section when checked)* >>> >>> *Note: Do not check this box without first reviewing with the community >>> on the e-mail list. This check box should be used only in rare cases.* >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Could someone please help me understand: is it OK to add examples to >>> concept pages? What does this message mean to prevent or encourage?**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Thanks much!**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Julee **** >>> >>> [1] >>> http://docs.webplatform.org/w/index.php?title=css/concepts/overset&action=formedit >>> **** >>> >>> ----------------------------**** >>> >>> julee@adobe.com**** >>> >>> @adobejulee**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >> >> >
Received on Tuesday, 13 August 2013 16:48:01 UTC