RE: JS content plan

Yes! But, we do not have someone to work on the templates right now. I was hoping whoever was going to do that could act in the same manner as Scott did before.

J


Sent from my "smart" phone... go figure...


-------- Original message --------
From: Eliot Graff
Date:11/12/2013 11:54 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: Julee Burdekin ,WebPlatform Public List
Subject: RE: JS content plan

Yes, like that! Do we need people to flesh out page structures like that?

Thanks,

E

From: Julee Burdekin [mailto:jburdeki@adobe.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 2:40 PM
To: Eliot Graff; WebPlatform Public List
Subject: RE: JS content plan

Hi, Eliot!
I hope I'm answering your questions, here.
Max has broken down the reference into the 9 top-level categories.[1] In that list, is an implied granularity. So, that's what'll be imported in. We may want to break down some of these more (separate pages for each error type, for instance), but this is the starting point for the page-level granularity. So we should review the pages and determine if a special template is needed: for example, the reserved word page doesn't need it's own template, right?
But we do need new templates for some JS language elements, right? For example, the Object template would need the following semantic fields:
* Summary (currently non-existent, appears in non-titled first section of content)
* Syntax (currently non-existent, appears in non-titled first section of content; derived content)
* Parameters
* Usage (currently part of "Remarks" section)
* Examples (currently part of "Remarks" section)
* Properties (derived content)
* Functions (derived content)
* Methods (derived content)
* Specification link (currently in "Requirements")
* Compatibility (currently in "Requirements")
* Attribution (currently non-existent)
* See also (currently non-existent)
Is that the kind of thing you're looking for? What do you think?
Julee
[1] http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Projects/javascript#Top-level_pages

Sent from my "smart" phone... go figure...


-------- Original message --------
From: Eliot Graff
Date:11/12/2013 8:04 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: Julee Burdekin ,WebPlatform Public List
Subject: RE: JS content plan
Hi Julee.

Thank you so much for doing this.

How granular do you think we need to go on the templates for the reference page? Do we need a separate template for functions, operators, objects, etc.? At the last Seattle doc sprint, people were looking for guidance like that for HTML elements, attributes, at the more granular level. I know for CSS we really just had the one Font property page as the exemplar. But that may be a different animal.

Cheers,

Eliot

From: Julee Burdekin [mailto:jburdeki@adobe.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 10:06 AM
To: WebPlatform Public List
Subject: JS content plan

Hi, folks:

I’ve started a content plan for the JavaScript import.[1] Please feel free to add to it, or send feedback my way.

Regards!

Julee
[1] http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Projects/javascript/content

----------------------------
julee@adobe.com<mailto:julee@adobe.com>
@adobejulee