[DOCU-774] Evaluate solutions for a distinct docs section for front-end developers Created: 18/Jul/16 Updated: 03/Jul/17 Resolved: 04/Oct/16 |
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | Documentation |
| Component/s: | None |
| Affects Version/s: | None |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | Task | Priority: | Neutral |
| Reporter: | Christoph Meier | Assignee: | Julie Legendre |
| Resolution: | Done | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | core | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Issue Links: |
|
||||||||
| Template: |
|
||||||||
| Acceptance criteria: |
Empty
|
||||||||
| Task DoR: |
Empty
|
||||||||
| Date of First Response: | |||||||||
| Sprint: | Docu Sprint 13 | ||||||||
| Description |
Tasks:
|
| Comments |
| Comment by Christoph Meier [ 19/Jul/16 ] |
|
I was labeling pages with the tag front-end-development. These pages are in a narrow or broad context relevant for front-end developers imho. Most these pages are also relevant for "other Magnolia developers" - those guys which are not typical front-end developers but which are using Magnolia since centuries. |
| Comment by Christoph Meier [ 19/Jul/16 ] |
Thoughts about a dedicated docs section for front-end-developersHow to separate the groups?If we separate between front-end-developers and others. What type of devs are the others? Back-end developers? What about full-stack devs? How to handle the distinction technically?Since many pages are valid for "both" groups - we would had to reuse content - for which confluence is not very handy. How to handle this? Should a "distinct section" be a separate wiki space? |
| Comment by Antti Hietala [ 19/Jul/16 ] |
Think of this effort simply as a campaign aimed at front-end developers. Collect a few resources that make a front-ender's life easier and present them in one place. That's enough. Don't worry about creating equally effective campaigns for back-end developers. We are making a big push about front-end dev so that's your audience for now.
This is my preferred option. It doesn't involve restructuring, building artificial doc page hierarchies or splitting topics. If a topic is relevant for a front-ender then label it and have the aggregation page do the work. |
| Comment by Martin DrĂ¡pela [ 05/Aug/16 ] |
|
I'm far from being able to do a QA for such a complicated issue. Rather, let me also add a suggestion, hopefully a workable one. As I see it, having some doc pages already labeled with the front-end-development label should make it relatively easy to "background" everything else. Let's then make a full use of this attribute. The server, of course, will have to know somehow that it is a front-ender who is staring at the screen now. This could be checked - for logged in users - via the <meta name="ajs-current-user-fullname"> tag. If the ajs-current-user-fullname would be associated with a "frontender" property (in MagDAP, or elswhere), the server pushing the DOC content would grey-out the links and page content not associated with the front-end-development label. Doc hyperlinks to pages labeled with the front-end-development label would be rendered in the usual magnolia green, but hyperlinks to non-front-end-development pages could be CSSed as #FF0000, suggesting that the target page has a wider scope. Creating two nav trees or another distinct section for front-enders is certainly possible as well, but IMHO much more complicated than personalizing Magnolia DOCs to frontenders via the already existing front-end-development label. |
| Comment by Martin DrĂ¡pela [ 12/Aug/16 ] |
|
Following the discussion, it turns out that p13n-ing the content for frontenders who are logged in is not a very viable option: a vast community of (unregistered) frontenders would be simply eliminated from accessing the p13n-ed content for frontenders. So, while paragraphs 3 and 4 of my previous post still hold, I suggest mirroring the whole /DOCS/ space to a new /FEDOCS/ space, which however - being a mirrored space - would never be edited directly. |
| Comment by Julie Legendre [ 04/Oct/16 ] |
|
|
| Comment by Christoph Meier [ 04/Oct/16 ] |
|
I agree jlegendre, for the time being i close this one. |