Re: Message "Do not check this box without first reviewing with the community on the e-mail list."

There. Why didn't I think of that? Thanks Julie!!!
~Scott



On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 10:29 AM, Julee Burdekin <jburdeki@adobe.com> wrote:

> Thanks, Scott! Any way to put the checkbox before the label? With the
> checkbox all the way at the end, it looks like we're telling the editor "This
> article does not need an example."
>
> J
> ----------------------------
> julee@adobe.com
> @adobejulee
>
> From: Scott Rowe <scottrowe@google.com>
> Date: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 9:47 AM
> To: Mike Sierra <letmespellitoutforyou@gmail.com>
> Cc: julee <jburdeki@adobe.com>, Eliot Graff <Eliot.Graff@microsoft.com>,
> 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."
>
> 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****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>