[Component amendment]: Merge or Deprecate Logo Section component in favor of Logo Section Pattern

[jmuzina]

Component/pattern to amend

Logo Section

Context

In #5632 @muhammad-ali-pk is implementing the "Logo section pattern", per this design from @kim-isaac .

This naming clashes with the existing "logo section" component. @kim-isaac believes that the logo section pattern will be the new "standard" way to use logo sections across our projects, and as such the logo section component in #5632 was informally slated to be deprecated in that PR - however we would like to confirm what the best approach is in this issue.

We see a few alternatives:

1. Merge the logo section component with the logo section pattern, and delete the docs page for the component. The logo section pattern requires the CSS of the logo section component, much like the pricing block, which presents a model of what a merged logo section page might look like. We could then document separately (on the same page) how to create logo sections with the pattern and underlying component.
2. Deprecate the logo section component in favor of only documenting the logo section pattern.
3. Keep the logo section component as-is, and introduce the logo section pattern, accepting them having the same name

In any case, patternless logo sections could still be built with either the logo section content block or raw markup (logo section still requires its own CSS), so this shouldn't be a breaking change - it's more a question of naming and documentation.

[syncronize-issues-to-jira[bot]]

Thank you for reporting your feedback to us!

The internal ticket has been created: https://warthogs.atlassian.net/browse/WD-26408.

This message was autogenerated

[muhammad-ali-pk]

@jmuzina Thank you for opening this discussion.

After revisiting the logo section component and checking out identical implementations with logo section content block, I am more inclined towards deprecating the logo section component, but also provide some documentation on the logo section pattern for rendering the logo section using the underlying markup if anyone still wishes to do so.

[juanruitina]

DS team will comment on this after further internal discussion. More a documentation/implementation matter than design.

Priority: High Tier: Sites

[jmuzina]

Discussed with @advl . We hold that patterns should be full-width page sections. Hence, the word "section" should be reserved for patterns in the future - however we need to avoid breaking changes to the existing logo section component.

So, we propose as an interim solution:

• Rename the logo section component "logos", while keeping the CSS classes p-logo-section for backwards compatibility and allowing people to build logos with pure markup. Add a link to the pattern and explain when to use the pattern versus the component.
• Name the pattern "logo block" rather than "logo section"
• In the future, in Pragma: the pattern will be called "logo section", and the component will be called "logos"

@kim-isaac what do you think?

[kim-isaac]

Thanks @juanruitina for taking the time to think about the naming. Since we already use “block” to mean something else, I’m a bit concerned about applying it at the pattern level, but if it’s for temporary I think that’s fine.

Do you know what the timeline looks like for Pragma? We’re also reviewing naming conventions more broadly for consistency, and there are a few other cases that may need renaming as well, so it would be great if we could align them together.

[muhammad-ali-pk]

I'll agree with @kim-isaac Since the "X section pattern" suggests we are targeting entire section, and given the fact we can also have sub-blocks in most of these patterns, it will cause further confusion if we name a pattern as "X block"

[advl]

Thanks @kim-isaac @jmuzina @muhammad-ali-pk to look at these naming conventions. What would be your preferences to name patterns in the future ?

1. Sections for canvas-width elements ?
2. What would "blocks" describe ? Maybe we should avoid using the word block for components altogether as it means a very particular thing in html ?
3. How would you recommend renaming the former Logo Section Component ?
4. @kim-isaac is there a place where we could consult the naming conventions you are thinking of ?

@kim-isaac : Atm, we're exploring a release for Early adopters likely next cycle, wider in 26.10. Unsure yet how would sites play out. Happy to get on a call to discuss this more

[muhammad-ali-pk]

@advl

Sections for canvas-width elements ?

Yeah sounds good

What would "blocks" describe ? Maybe we should avoid using the word block for components altogether as it means a very particular thing in html ?

In my opinion, maybe we can still use the word for reusable entities (like cta block being re-used in basic section, divided section, logo section). It doesn't necessarily have to be an atomic level thing.

How would you recommend renaming the former Logo Section Component ?

Maybe Logo block? It would not only imply that this block is reusable, but also solve our naming issue at hand

[kim-isaac]

Thanks @advl @jmuzina @muhammad-ali-pk !

is there a place where we could consult the naming conventions you are thinking of ?

Here’s a draft of the related document. It’s still a WIP, so some parts may be missing, but feedback on whether the content so far is clear, aligned (as well as what might be worth adding) would really help me move it forward.

Sections for canvas-width elements ?

Agree with you, since patterns are always delivered at the section level, I think the term “section” should only be used within patterns.

What would "blocks" describe ? Maybe we should avoid using the word block for components altogether as it means a very particular thing in html ?

For block naming, I’d prefer input from the all of you, since you will have a clearer sense of whether there are any conflicts.

How would you recommend renaming the former Logo Section Component ?

If we keep using block as part of the naming, I agree with @muhammad-ali-pk 's suggestion to go with logo block.

Overall naming conventions may be hard to finalise within this cycle, but I think it would be good to align on guideline and timelines in a follow-up meeting. Sophie will be back soon, and her expertise would be valuable here too! So how about we schedule something after 360?

[jmuzina]

I would support renaming the "logo section" component to "logo block" and naming this new pattern "logo section" to stay consistent with your draft approach to naming @kim-isaac

I don't think it's a problem for the "logo block" to include the word "block" as it is a block element rather than an inline element.

@muhammad-ali-pk let us know what your timing requirements are for #5632 and we can see if we need to release the pattern before coming to a more formal naming decision on the component.

[muhammad-ali-pk]

@jmuzina We don't have a hard timing requirement for this pattern's delivery. We can roll it out together with the next pattern.

Just to reiterate your suggestions

1. We should rename "logo section component" to "logo block"
2. Rename "logo section pattern" to "logo section"
3. Remove the deprecation notice

@jmuzina @advl @kim-isaac Do you guys agree with this decision on this matter? Or should it wait for coming to a more formal naming decision?

[kim-isaac]

@muhammad-ali-pk Sounds good to me!

[jmuzina]

@muhammad-ali-pk yes this checks out to me. @advl please feel free to add comments as well.