Re: Queries in Getting Started workflows

I am with Scott on leaving difficulty out. It is very subjective based on a
persons experience and skill level in different areas. The more general you
try to think of difficulty levels the less helpful it becomes, if it were
even helpful in the first place. I think if people look at something, they
can gauge themselves whether they are able to do it. A difficulty level
wouldn't really aid, just add extra stuff to go through.

-Garbee



On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Scott Rowe <scottrowe@google.com> wrote:

> 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.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
>