docs
docs copied to clipboard
Phase 1: Adding documentation metadata tags
Proposed Changes
In preparation for a CNCF TechDocs Assessment, start labelling Knative documentation with metadata to assist with re-organizing content to different information architecture options (we will still need manual review, but this may simplify that review).
I'm using a schema with 3 fields:
| field | allowed values | explanation |
|---|---|---|
audience |
developer, administrator, buyer |
Who the target audience is; ensure documents have a clear, single audience |
components |
eventing, functions, serving (list) |
What components are featured on the page. |
function |
marketing, community, tutorial, how-to, reference, explanation |
A diataxis tag or "marketing" or "community" indicating the needs addressed by the documentation. |
Deploy Preview for knative ready!
Built without sensitive environment variables
| Name | Link |
|---|---|
| Latest commit | aaac40ea8ec352f1b74e7aa8932d31d3349115b1 |
| Latest deploy log | https://app.netlify.com/projects/knative/deploys/6870c38a70f3ee00087d806b |
| Deploy Preview | https://deploy-preview-6274--knative.netlify.app |
| Preview on mobile | Toggle QR Code...Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link. |
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.
https://diataxis.fr/complex-hierarchies/#two-dimensional-problems may be helpful when figuring out how to structure these eventually.
@dwelsch-esi -- PTAL (please take a look), as this should help (hopefully) with the initial phase of techdocs assessment. If this makes sense to you, then you can reply with /lgtm at the start of a line, and Prow will merge this PR (and it will be pushed to Netlify / go live). You can also take a look at the Netlify preview, though it should be roughly identical to the current live site, as the new metadata is only in the source code.
@evankanderson, Just one minor question regarding audience:
The same page can be relevant to more than one audience. Looks like you've inserted comments to that effect in some of the files, for example docs/eventing/accessing-traces.md:
audience: administrator
# And audience: developer for accessing traces
Is there a reason you didn't make this field a list like you did for components? Regardless, I don't think this is a big deal -- I'm sure the role you've identified in each case is the primary audience for the page. If the meta tags become super important later, you could open another PR to update them, but I don't think this question is worth holding up the merge.
/lgtm
@dwelsch-esi: changing LGTM is restricted to collaborators
In response to this:
@evankanderson, Just one minor question regarding audience:
The same page can be relevant to more than one audience. Looks like you've inserted comments to that effect in some of the files, for example
docs/eventing/accessing-traces.md:audience: administrator # And audience: developer for accessing tracesIs there a reason you didn't make this field a list like you did for components? Regardless, I don't think this is a big deal -- I'm sure the role you've identified in each case is the primary audience for the page. If the meta tags become super important later, you could open another PR to update them, but I don't think this question is worth holding up the merge.
/lgtm
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.
@evankanderson, Just one minor question regarding audience:
The same page can be relevant to more than one audience. Looks like you've inserted comments to that effect in some of the files, for example
docs/eventing/accessing-traces.md:audience: administrator # And audience: developer for accessing tracesIs there a reason you didn't make this field a list like you did for components? Regardless, I don't think this is a big deal -- I'm sure the role you've identified in each case is the primary audience for the page. If the meta tags become super important later, you could open another PR to update them, but I don't think this question is worth holding up the merge.
Generally, I'm suspicious of trying to target more than one audience or purpose in a single document. In cataloguing our current docs, we do mix these audiences, but I would probably prefer to move a bunch of the installation docs separate from the usage docs, rather than encourage this mixing.
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED
This pull-request has been approved by: Cali0707, evankanderson
The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
The pull request process is described here
- ~~OWNERS~~ [Cali0707,evankanderson]
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment