-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 28
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
QA: A few cosmetic issues #342
Comments
Thanks @jasmussen, great work! Yeah lots of these are being tracked in other issues, I'll go through and link them up. |
Fixed by #326 |
Fixed by #346 |
These are there in prod, but at the start of the list. Perhaps the bottom (like staging) is better? |
Oh, my mistake! I'm actually very happy to defer to you or anyone better versed in this content than myself, so we can scratch it from the list. My main confusion was not seeing it at the bottom like the other, but also that those 4 items lack descriptions. Simply adding descriptions would go a long way. |
Created a next iteration issue for this WordPress/wporg-mu-plugins#508 |
The ToC styles have been updated in WordPress/wporg-mu-plugins#499, however https://developer.wordpress.org/redesign-test/block-editor/reference-guides/block-api/block-deprecation/ is still not right. Seems like it could be a content issue with that markdown. Needs more digging. @ndiego if you have time could you please take a look to see whether there is anything unusual there? Other Block Editor pages don't seem to have this issue. |
Created a new issue in parent theme for this, it's also present on Showcase. |
@adamwoodnz I think I figured it out. That doc has incorrect headings, an H3 appears before an H2. This seems to break the TOC. I can fix the doc, but perhaps we need a patch for the TOC generator as well? I have no doubt that this could happen again 😅 |
Fixed by #352 |
Closing now, as I believe everything has been addressed or has a separate issue raised. Haven't previously noted that callouts are covered by #315 |
Did a quick round of QA on the work in progress site. Overall it's looking really solid, a huge step forward in every way. I didn't find any big issues, and as such, collecting what I've found so far here in a single issue. But let me know if you'd like me to extract some of these to separate issues. Anything in the "Nice to have" category is not urgent, especially if tricky. In general, all of this feedback applies to both the Developer Resources site, but also to any other section that uses these patterns.
Nice to have: This dropdown could ideally be a button that opened a custom dropdown.
A smaller fix would be to have the focus style only be as big as the default content side the select, which may also be nontrivial.
Focus:
Focus + active, note that this also causes a layout shift:
Nice to have: hovering the mid-dot in pagination should not be the same as hovering the "Next" button. Shown here, I'm hovering the mid dot.
The mid-dot is just meant to be text. It's not a big deal.
This one is somewhere between nice to have and good to fix for launch. We don't have a "back to top" link on the site today, so if this one is tricky to address, one thing we could do is to just omit the back to top link until such a time as we can implement it with the "appear on scroll" behavior.
There are 4 items linked in the CLI page that don't seem like they should be there:
Nice to have: The Edit links are a bit clunky:
I would hide them from the Chapters list, remove the icon, and make them a fixed font-size, say 14px.
Nice to have: These notices could be better:
It's not entirely clear to me if these are "content", and therefore separate from the refresh or not, but noting for reference that the visual style and icon of this yellow notice is incorrect. If it's content, it's nice to have, if it's part of the refresh, we should address it.
You can use one of these callouts instead.
They could look like this:
On this page, the TOC wraps a bit awkwardly:
There appears to be a nested list margin causing trouble here:
Not sure if that's obsolete per some of the TOC changes discussed here or not.
I believe this is the pattern to follow:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: