Add extensions additional tutorials links to learnsidebar #41242
Conversation
chrisdavidmills
requested review from
dipikabh and
hamishwillee
and removed request for
a team
github-actions
bot
added
Content:Learn
|
Would this fix #29240? |
files/en-us/learn_web_development/extensions/forms/html_forms_in_legacy_browsers/index.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
files/en-us/web/performance/guides/performance_budgets/index.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
files/en-us/learn_web_development/extensions/performance/best_practices/index.md
Show resolved
Hide resolved
I guess 2023 Will didn't think so: #29240 (comment) I suppose the question is, do we think this page properly coheres with the rest of Learn/Performance, and does it have some sort of desirable and comprehensible relationship with https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Performance ? It's also a question about IA: why do we have Learn/Performance and Web/Performance, what are the criteria for putting stuff in one or the other, and how do they relate? |
I think you could ask the same for the guides section under HTML/JS/CSS and the language-specific learning docs. The answer seems to be they are just rehashes of the same stuff, with the non-learn docs being slightly more "formal" and in-depth. I usually think of the learning docs as being a separate website (think freeCodeCamp). If we aren't afraid to have duplicate content with W3School or freeCodeCamp, then we shouldn't be afraid to duplicate content between Learn/ and Web/. Of course that's a bit too extreme. |
FWIW I agree with this. They are a more tutorial-like guided path through the same information, with an audience that is more clearly a beginner and a style (IMO) that is annoyingly conversational. I have no problem with the rehash if it useful in the context of Learn module and not duplication within the module. But I don't think this performance doc is "resources", I think it it is "best practices". #41242 (comment) Ultimately though I don't want to answer any of the questions - I want @chrisdavidmills to :-) |
Yes, I do agree with that. The reason the IA is especially relevant here, as I said in the original issue report, is that it was moved from Web/Performance to Learn/Performance, but the nav and and content were not updated so as to integrate it into Learn. It seems like this PR updates the nav but doesn't address the content. Addressing the content means thinking of what sort of thing we want this page to be and what it means as a part of Learn - that is, to think about IA. Not addressing the content in this PR is fine too! But if you ask me, does it fix the issue I raised where I say that the content is part of the issue, I'm going to say no. |
Yeah, fixing a load of content was never in the remit of this PR. |
Gee, thanks ;-) There were very clear reasons for wanting to have beginner's content on MDN when we started it way back in about 2015, and I don't think these have changed. Over time, the Learn content became too bloated and too complex for beginners, which is one reason why I am trying to update the content and bring it back to basics again. I'd personally be happy to get rid of some of the extension modules out of the learn area. But again, that's a conversation for a different PR. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@chrisdavidmills Yeah, I'm aware of the reasons and background of Learn. Its the closest thing we have to guided tutorials on MDN, and I think that's a good thing.
Don't take offence to my " annoyingly conversational." comment. IMO it is a general flaw of tutorials that they are written like my cool over-excited mate is standing next to me telling me what to do next.
I don't want my mate there - I want a sensei :-). Learn docs less offensive than many tutorial sites in this respect.
I think we should keep the Web resources page, because I don't know enough about the other content to assess its importance. However I would prefer that we renamed it. Perhaps to something like “Web Performance: Best Practices & Tips” - because that is more what it is.
But if you don't want to, I would still approve this as better than before and achieving what you intended.
Co-authored-by: Hamish Willee <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Hamish Willee <[email protected]>
Don't worry, no offence taken. It made me giggle ;-)
I do agree that some sites go over the top with this style, but this is definitely a personal preference thing. There are whole publishing imprints built on peer-to-peer information.
Yeah, this is a better title. I have updated the title and slug (moved it) again, and updated the necessary linkage. |
hamishwillee
left a comment
hamishwillee
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM! Thanks @chrisdavidmills !
chrisdavidmills
deleted the
learn-sidebar-links-to-extensions-additional-tutorials
branch
4 participants
Description
There are still several Learn articles not linked from the learnsidebar. The ones we want to keep should really be linked in some way. This PR adds an "Additional tutorials" subsection at the end of the extension modules to contain the additional tutorials.
In one case (performance), I didn't add it into "Additional tutorials"; I just moved the article so that the slug made more sense, and then added it into the main flow of that module.
In one case (forms), I edited an article to make it a) more useful and b) actually make sense in the context of earlier forms articles in the same module (we don't want to cover all those CSS techniques only to then say "don't style form elements" in a later article).
Motivation
Additional details
Related issues and pull requests