[Case study] GEDI -- needs partner approval

[alexandrascript]

Changes proposed in this pull request:

• Create new case study for GEDI

MUST ADDRESS: open questions from Gilberto in the doc

[chrome-devrel-review-bot]

Hello! This is an automated review by our custom reviewbot. It updates automatically when code or GitHub comments in this pull request are created or updated.

Requested changes

If there are any common problems with the content files you created or modified, they will be listed here.

src/site/content/en/blog/gedi/index.md

• This file passed all of our automated Markdown audits.

[netlify[bot]]

❌ Deploy Preview for web-dev-staging failed.

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	94dad87cca5720b0d0de7b47f35643b2d8d1beeb
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/web-dev-staging/deploys/62fcecd09b39f500085dff9c

[alexandrascript]

@malchata all changes should be resolved.

I'm unsure if we want Kapwing's case study out first, but this doesn't have any more reason to hold that I'm aware of.

[alexandrascript]

One exception, possibly -- final partner review. @rowan-m for more on that.

[malchata]

I didn't own either one of these, so I'm not sure what the particulars are. I'll trust y'all to know what to do/when to smash that merge button and subscribe.

[gilbertococchi]

Hi all, thanks for publishing the draft.

I would like to ask two changes if possible:

Text below: "The team then spent some time optimizing the site layout for stability by, for example, reserving space for images based on their aspect ratio."

should be replaced with (feel free to reword as necessary):

"The team then spent some time optimizing the site layout for stability by, for example, reserving space for images based on their aspect ratio. They also reserved space for Ads, first on the Top ad in the first viewport and later also on the mid page one in order to assure users can start reading their article without experiencing annoying content jumps."

The final part of Next Steps has to go away ("GEDI's next step is to improve cumulative layout...") should be removed because outdated, will get some new content for Next steps ASAP so we can publish that.

[matthiasrohmer]

@heyawhite, Kapwing's case study is live and Gilberto's feedback seems to be in. Is this good to go? 🙂

[alexandrascript]

@matthiasrohmer last I knew it was handed off to @malchata in December -- GEDI still needed to give final approval, per an email from December 16.

I would also assume it's good to go but it's not really my coverage.

@malchata any concerns?

[alexandrascript]

Looks like there were additional changes made in the draft doc -- this should not be merged until that is sorted. I'll make some of the changes that seem clear, but there are still open questions.