Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Guidance on usage of Authoring Practices Guide vs. editor’s drafts #2356

Closed
thibaudcolas opened this issue May 24, 2022 · 4 comments
Closed
Assignees
Labels
Feedback Issue raised by or for collecting input from people outside APG task force Site Design Related to design of the APG site on w3.org built during 2021 redesign project

Comments

@thibaudcolas
Copy link

Separately to – #2332 I’d like to request a few changes on the APG About page based on my first-time experience:

  • The Introduction section is very long. All of it seems like valuable information but I had a hard time feeling motivated to read it all. Could it be structured into further sub-sections with their own headings, to make it easier to scan the contents?
  • In the past I’ve always sent people towards the 1.3 editor’s draft. Could there be a section on the About page (perhaps under Change History?) or elsewhere to clearly state how this document differs from 1.3? Perhaps link to the 1.3 editor’s draft with the appropriate caveats.
@mcking65 mcking65 self-assigned this May 24, 2022
@mcking65 mcking65 added the Feedback Issue raised by or for collecting input from people outside APG task force label May 24, 2022
@mcking65 mcking65 added this to the Q2/2022 APG Content Updates milestone May 24, 2022
@css-meeting-bot
Copy link
Member

The ARIA Authoring Practices (APG) Task Force just discussed Guidance on usage of Authoring Practices Guide vs. editor’s drafts.

The full IRC log of that discussion <MarkMcCarthy> TOPIC: Guidance on usage of Authoring Practices Guide vs. editor’s drafts
<jamesn> github: https://github.com//issues/2356
<MarkMcCarthy> Matt_King: 2 issues in this, one on the intro and one on the editor's draft
<MarkMcCarthy> Matt_King: editor's draft part of this should be straightforward, eventually.
<jongunderson> https://w3c.github.io/aria-practices
<MarkMcCarthy> Matt_King: the rendering of the main branch (the current "editor's draft") will be replaced by our site here - when we update the main branch, it'll get pushed to the site by the W3C
<MarkMcCarthy> jongunderson: how do we preview things?
<MarkMcCarthy> Matt_King: PRs will have a netlify preview now
<MarkMcCarthy> Matt_King: there's also a netlify preview for the main branch
<MarkMcCarthy> Matt_King: not useful to point people to that though, it's only good for a day or two at atime
<MarkMcCarthy> Matt_King: approximately this will all happen towards the end of june, but here's still planning to do
<MarkMcCarthy> MarkMcCarthy: what about their introduction comment?
<MarkMcCarthy> MarkMcCarthy: part of the plan is to create a TOC, separate the intro out, and make things a little more independent
<MarkMcCarthy> s/MarkMcCarthy: part/Matt_King: part

@basher
Copy link

basher commented Jun 8, 2022

Another comment about the readability/legibility of the APG About page...

Maybe set a max character limit on lines of freeform text?
i.e. no more than 80 chars.

@isaacdurazo isaacdurazo added the Site Design Related to design of the APG site on w3.org built during 2021 redesign project label Oct 31, 2022
@mcking65
Copy link
Contributor

mcking65 commented Mar 7, 2023

@mcking65
Copy link
Contributor

All feedback addressed by above referenced issues.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Feedback Issue raised by or for collecting input from people outside APG task force Site Design Related to design of the APG site on w3.org built during 2021 redesign project
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants