Re: Queries in Getting Started workflows

Hi Paul,

Good questions! IMHO:

On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Paul Rosenbusch <
paul.rosenbusch.wpd@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Scott,
>
> thanks for moving this into a new thread - I still need to get used to
> the whole mailing-list thing :)
>
> As far as I see it, we could use the following properties:
>
> - Priority: This could be integrated into the current semantic form,
> maybe as a numeric value?
>

Yes, with values:
P0 - top priority
P1 - must have
P2 - nice to have
P3 - ha, if you're  lucky

Let's be sure the priority is on the whole article, not just the example
section.



> - Difficulty / Skill required: What categories would you propose?
> Maybe this could also be added to the semantic form?
>

This is difficult. One man's knot is another man's bow. I don't think we
can reliably predict how difficult it will be to create any particular code
sample. We can omit this one.


> - Domain expertise: Could we use Topic clusters or Topics for this?
>

Topics.


>
> Maybe I misunderstood this - is the differentiation only required for
> API documentation itself and anyone can do examples, or are some
> examples far more challenging?
>

Well, as I said, I don't think we can know how difficult the task will be,
and we probably don't need this level of granularity.


>
> I'm confident that I can finish the queries until February 23rd, but
> the interesting part will be to create input-fields for these
> properties and to set the correct values on some
> high-priority-articles.
>

True! We'll have to run through Chris' spreadsheet and set the priority for
each article listed. But I would say that can wait until after next
weekend's doc sprint.

My availability on Monday will be spotty as it is a holiday here. But I'll
start working on the Getting Started pages and incorporating your queries.
Please continue to work in your User: space, I'll just copy and paste from
there.

Terrific work, Paul! Thanks again!
+Scott




>
> --Paul R.
>
> 2013/2/14 Scott Rowe <scottrowe@google.com>:
> > (first raised in
> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webplatform/2013Feb/0088.html
> )
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > From: Scott Rowe <scottrowe@google.com>
> > Date: Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 11:33 AM
> > Subject: Re: Feedback from Berlin doc sprint
> > To: Paul Rosenbusch <paul.rosenbusch.wpd@gmail.com>
> > Cc: "public-webplatform@w3.org" <public-webplatform@w3.org>
> >
> >
> > Hi Paul!
> >
> > I hope you're feeling better!
> >
> > Your excellent work can be used in our Getting Started work flows. One of
> > the ideas that Rodney Rehm had was that we need to set up our Getting
> > Started tasks according to domain expertise and skill required. So, you
> can
> > imagine a page set up for working in the API domain and a section of
> tasks
> > for developers, one of which would be contributing code examples and -
> bing!
> > - your list of articles requiring code examples. The developer just
> clicks
> > on a link to an article, and off they go. Same for the CSS domain.
> >
> > I'd love to be able to get this together in time for our next doc sprint
> -
> > February 23rd in San Francisco. Most of it is dependent upon me to work
> out
> > the Getting Started flow and pages. As I recall you had a few more things
> > you'd like to add to the queries, but as far as I can see, we can use
> them
> > starting now.
> >
> > Tell you what though, let's take this discussion into a separate thread
> so
> > as not to confuse the issue here. This thread was started to talk about
> doc
> > sprint participant feedback. I'll paste all this in a new thread. Stay
> > tuned.
> >
> > And, thanks again for the terrrific work here!
> >
> > +Scott
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Paul Rosenbusch
> > <paul.rosenbusch.wpd@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> The mailing list does not seem to publish my first message, so I'll
> >> submit it again just to be sure. I hope nobody gets duplicate mails
> >> because of this :)
> >>
> >> 2013/2/14 Chris Mills <cmills@opera.com>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 14 Feb 2013, at 14:52, Tobie Langel <tobie@fb.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > n Thursday, February 14, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Chris Mills wrote:
> >> > >> 1. Some people want to just look at site compatibility info, or
> code
> >> > >> examples. It would be nice to create the site in a way that people
> can
> >> > >> search to just bring up site compat info or code examples, and not
> have to
> >> > >> trawl through all the full reference pages.
> >> > > Sounds like this is something the test resource center[1] might
> >> > > partially be able to address.
> >> >
> >> > Perhaps, yes.
> >>
> >>  During the docsprint I worked on semantic querys that list articles
> >>  needing examples. Unfortunately I got the flu right after and could
> >>  not work on it this week.
> >>
> >>  I still need to document the whole thing and maybe optimize the
> >>  output. Regardless of that, the template is usable at the moment. You
> >>  can find an example implementation here:
> >>
> >>
> http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/User:Paul.rosenbusch/Articles_needing_examples
> >>
> >>  Where do you think would be the best place to put these tables?
> >>
> >>  If needed I could also create a custom output format, but currently I
> >>  have no idea which formatting would work best.
> >>
> >>  --Paul R.
> >>
> >>
> >
>