Skip to content

Docs: Diátaxis refactor - iteration 2 high-level tracking #9747

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

Closed
30 of 31 tasks
benjaoming opened this issue Nov 21, 2022 · 9 comments
Closed
30 of 31 tasks

Docs: Diátaxis refactor - iteration 2 high-level tracking #9747

benjaoming opened this issue Nov 21, 2022 · 9 comments
Assignees
Labels
Improvement Minor improvement to code Needed: documentation Documentation is required

Comments

@benjaoming
Copy link
Contributor

benjaoming commented Nov 21, 2022

Successor of #9746

This is a high-level issue moved from the initial planning document. Further issues may be opened and linked from here.

  • Acceptance Criteria: New sub-levels are created in Explanation and How-to, old How-to sub-levels are removed, Any remaining “Features” are moved to Reference and finally delete “Features”. Out of scope: Articles that have to be created from scratch.

  • Outcome: The menu already starts to have clear entrypoints aligned with Diátaxis (but it is still lengthy).

Ongoing work from iteration 1

Before everything else

About creating new sub-levels: A sub-level contains a stub index.rst with a TOC. The TOC can refer to any other page in the Sphinx project, but make sure to remove that page from other TOCs.

Glossary update

  • Add more common terms to the glossary and apply them where they are needed. Common words: "reproducible", "docs", "pinning" Docs: New entries to glossary #10249
  • Ensure we're no longer saying "VCS" anywhere that can just read "Git".

Relabel

Existing contents are moved with light changes to title and content. Intentionally not called “move” because we don’t change URLs and break stuff, we just relabel it.

Split

Existing article is split up and some new contents are added to shape the new results. Every Split action has at least 2 destinations.

  • Empty

Improve

New

Remove

  • Remove "Read the Docs for Business" - analyze if certain contents might live elsewhere.

After everything else

  • "All How-to Guides - Index page" is created as the last sub-level in How-to Guides.
  • old How-to sub-levels are removed, Any remaining “Features” are moved to Reference and finally delete “Features”
  • About Read the Docs is removed (if it wasn't already removed) It doesn't make sense to remove right now
@benjaoming
Copy link
Contributor Author

benjaoming commented Feb 21, 2023

Dumping some notes from the sentence-case refactor... will order them as tasks later in this or other iterations... or not at all:

  • We should use refactor our docs to use menuselection in a lot of cases where we use guilabel.
  • A lot of places could benefit from tabs:: to show alternative instructions for GitHub/Bitbucket or Sphinx/MkDocs etc.
  • We write our features with lower-case generally. For instance "server side search" is a feature, but it's not a Proper Noun. We haven't named features as such.
  • Exceptions for APIs? Public API, Embed API, Server Side Search API?
  • Sphinx-specific guides should use a convention: "How to do X (Sphinx)"
  • We should generally write "documentation" rather than "docs".
  • "Read the Docs for Community" => "Read the Docs Community" (or just use org_brand)
  • Go through all :orphan: pages?
  • Privacy Policy is widely used as a proper noun, I didn't change that, but I did change the title of the page to "Privacy policy" and I think since it's just a privacy policy, we don't need to call it by a proper noun. Otherwise, we can call soooo many generic things by Proper Nouns.... our Platform, our Documentation etc.
  • "Configuration file" not "Configuration File" or "Config File".

@benjaoming
Copy link
Contributor Author

A lot of guides have Troubleshooting nested inside the guide, while some other troubleshooting items are separate. I'm wondering if this should be changed so all Troubleshooting is lodged next to its how-to guide, rather than in separate sections.

@ericholscher
Copy link
Member

ericholscher commented Feb 21, 2023

We should generally write "documentation" rather than "docs".

Kinda goes against our brand, though? Not sold on this one.

Sphinx-specific guides should use a convention: "How to do X (Sphinx)"

I think you just want in Sphinx. Using any other convention feels weird to a reader or Googler.

We should use refactor our docs to use menuselection in a lot of cases where we use guilabel.

Seems quite low priority, FWIW. Only if we do another full doc review, or just in the normal work of updating content.

"Read the Docs for Community" => "Read the Docs Community" (or just use org_brand)

Yea, I thought that's what we were doing already?

"Configuration file" not "Configuration File" or "Config File".

Again, I'm not 100% sold that the longer version is better here. Config is pretty commonly used, but worth a discussion.

A lot of guides have Troubleshooting nested inside the guide, while some other troubleshooting items are separate. I'm wondering if this should be changed so all Troubleshooting is lodged next to its how-to guide, rather than in separate sections.

This seems reasonable for small troubleshooting suggestions. Breaking them out is almost certainly going to make a worse experience for the user.

I do think we have some troubleshooting-only content though, like our existing troubleshooting pages. Those seems guide-level.

@benjaoming
Copy link
Contributor Author

  • Found an occurrence in config file v2 "Our build servers run Ubuntu 18.04, with the default set of package repositories installed. We don't currently support PPA's or other custom repositories."

@agjohnson
Copy link
Contributor

agjohnson commented Feb 22, 2023

We should generally write "documentation" rather than "docs".

Kinda goes against our brand, though? Not sold on this one.

I'm +1 on documentation generally, docs is a bit jargony or at least shorthand, and it has overlap with "docs" authored from Word/Google Docs/etc or "legal docs".

@ericholscher
Copy link
Member

We should generally write "documentation" rather than "docs".

Kinda goes against our brand, though? Not sold on this one.

I'm +1 on documentation generally, docs is a bit jargony or at least shorthand, and it has overlap with "docs" authored from Word/Google Docs/etc or "legal docs".

Good point. Makes sense for a general rule to use documentation I guess.

@benjaoming
Copy link
Contributor Author

Note to add something in our style guide about using explicit labels rather than headlines, the refactor shows that it's harder to improve headlines when they are also used in references that break. We probably want to tweak more headlines.

@benjaoming
Copy link
Contributor Author

Open PRs should be referenced here.

These are the items that don't have PRs open now:

@ericholscher
Copy link
Member

Going to call this done, as we've finished up the last little bits here. 🎉

@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from Needs review to Done in 📍Roadmap Aug 15, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Improvement Minor improvement to code Needed: documentation Documentation is required
Projects
Archived in project
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants