Re: Revamping Flags

If we remove all but three flags, we will have to re-write all of the
Getting Started[1] and Editor's Guide[2] pages. I recommend keeping the
flags - and the prescribed workflows for contributors - while making them
less obtrusive.


[1] http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Getting_Started
[2] http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Editors_Guide


On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 9:53 AM, Lea Verou <lea@w3.org> wrote:

> Good idea. Besides this, I think we should make the flags a bit less
> prominent visually. Right now, they’re the first thing somebody notices in
> every article, and they kind of put people off because they’re so many.
> Once we get the content in good shape and there aren't so many issues, we
> could work on making them more prominent...
>
> Lea Verou
> W3C developer relations
> http://w3.org/people/all#lea ✿ http://lea.verou.me ✿ @leaverou
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 25, 2013, at 12:13, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi, folks-
> >
> > We've had many people report that they are discouraged, intimidated, and
> confused by the current set of flags.
> >
> > Julee and I discussed this when I was giving her the rundown of the
> recent Seattle Doc Sprint, and we think perhaps we should remove most of
> the flags.
> >
> > We propose the following 3 flags (for now):
> > 1) Unconfirmed Imported Content: for MSDN or other automated content
> >
> > 2) Needs Review: general purpose, for people who want to review of the
> content they've changed, or people who want to flag something as odd
> >
> > 3) Needs Examples: For pages where the examples aren't up to snuff, or
> no examples exist. (In writing this email, it occurs to me that we could
> also add flags for each of the WPW tasks, but I haven't thought deeply
> about it.)
> >
> > I propose that we discuss the flags on this thread for the next week,
> then next week, we change the templates to remove most of the flags.
> >
> > Changes to the visible style will be done later.
> >
> > Regards-
> > -Doug
> >
>
>
>