Welcome to the weekly Project Browser Initiative - Site Builders Subcommittee meeting. This meeting:
➤ happens right here every Tuesday at 1pm PT | 4pm ET | 9:00pm UTC
➤ is chat only (no audio or video)
➤ happens in threads (please add threads to propose an additional discussion topic)
➤ will be exported as a transcript and posted to the agenda issue
| leslieg |
My feedback so far: (edited) |
| leslieg |
We have an issue to create a template to help standardize the project pages on Drupal.org. Currently each maintainers puts information wherever they want. For example, “Projects that extend this module” is sometimes in the Body and sometimes in the “Resources” section. So it may or may not be included if we are only displaying the body field. Would really to make progress on that issue to help with this work. |
| leslieg |
Feedback from folks we interviewed wanted additional demos and screenshots of using the projects. We should include that |
| leslieg |
The work so far is a good start and the contributions are much appreciated. Would be good to figure out the next logical steps on this item with input from the intended audiences. |
| leslieg |
@hestenet (he/him) Your feedback on keeping project data in drupal.org and pulling from there makes sense to me and I think that’s the goal. We originally were going to link folks to D.o for the detailed pages for MVP, but having a page right in the Project browser makes sense as we want them to use the Project Browser tool from within their website without linking out. Do you have thoughts on that? |
| rkoller |
is there already one or two modules that provide all the content and information that is possible for the sekeltong when using the dev version of project browser? have only take a look at the pathauto module right now. |
| hestenet (he/him) |
@leslieg having a page 'in-browser' so you dont have to leave the experience does make sense. |
| leslieg |
Looks like we are only pulling a few fields from Drupal.org at the moment. The data will not be consistent since module maintainers are not consistently using the project pages @rkoller The data from the body field is being pulled in for all the modules I checked. |
| rkoller |
yep that was what i was suspecting. but i thought perhaps there is one or two example modules that provide the full set of information/fields intended. to get an idea about the skeleton. if you have a patchwork due to incomplete information provided by the different module maintainers it is at least difficult to give feedback about the current state of the skeleton. (edited) |
| leslieg |
Good thinking, let me look @rkoller |
| rkoller |
two details i’ve noticed aside. the small arrows in the breadcrumb are pointing right to left in project browser while in the claro header from left to right. and on the left of the browse link there shouldn’t be any at all imho.and the other detail is a readability related. the linelength is way too long. eventhough it is a triple AAA criteria , i have dragged my browser window a bit wider and i get a line length of 227. if i drag it to the max for the chaos tools suite it gets to 272 characters. the goal is ~80. (https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/quickref/?showtechniques=148#visual-presen.... -> C20). It makes the reading quite hard. you could try the straw test. try to look through a straw (or form a loose fist, if you dont have a straw , so you are able to see through the side of the fist like through a straw). then start at one line and try to read it. that shouldnt be a problem. the problem is if you try to jump from one end of the line to the beginning of the next line underneath. the challenge gets more and more difficult the longer the line gets. (edited) |
| leslieg |
@rkoller The Pathauto module on d.o seems to have all the fields used by the skeleton for the individual module page - logo (first image on d.o), number of downloads, security coverage, title, and body. There are several fields on d.o that are not included - we will need to discuss reasoning as to what was included in the skeleton and what else would be helpful |
| leslieg |
Screen Shot 2022-07-26 at 5.08.03 PM.png |
| rkoller |
thank you! will take a look now. the only details that directly struck my eye are “drupal 8 requirements” and drupal 7 requirements”. drupal 8 is EOL and drupal 7 is eol sooner or later but also not of any relevance for modules within project browser? shouldnt that be removed?and it would be nice to see the d.o usericons of the maintainers. that provides a bit more visual feedback and a way you are able to recognize folks. i mean if you are someone new to drupal and you for example test pathauto. you see hey that is a total solid and reliable module. then when you browse the modules you are able to recognize the picture of the maintainer. or even better. at the moment if you click the maintainer link you get to d.o. instead wouldnt it be better to have some sort of maintainer page that lists other modules that maintainer is involved in? |
| rkoller |
and above you’ve mentioned that folks you talked with wished more demos and screenshots. so would for example pathauto get screenshots and demos? (edited) |
| leslieg |
We started, but have not completed discussions on improving the drupal.org pages. For MVP, we focused on adding logos, non-technical short descriptions and reviewing categories. Those fields display on the grid and list view so we started there. |
| rkoller |
ahhhh all right. thanks for clarification! |
| leslieg |
I did notice that besides not displaying the images (other than the 1st one for the logo). maintainers aren’t listed, there is no link to the issue queue, resources aren’t displayed, etc. And yes the Body field has a mix of content for different Drupal versions and since the project browser will be inside a Drupal website, the information presented should only apply to that version. There is lots of work to be done to make the project pages on d.o more consistent and easier to use in the project browser, but a good start has been made. Thanks for the feedback |
| rkoller |
yep i agree a lot of work ahead but also already a lot of work done already |
| leslieg |
Thanks to a lot of contributions! |
| rkoller |
btw shall i open two issues for the bread crumb and the line length? |
| rkoller |
the bread crumb pattern also differs functionwise from the regular drupal one. it does one detail in a more proper way. the last element of a breadcrumb should never be an active link. that is correct for project browser but not in drupal if you compare both. |
| leslieg |
yes, please open new issues for those items |
| rkoller |
will do |
| rkoller |
and one other detail. i have still a pending question over in the admin-ui channel about the drupal design system and buttons with icons. https://drupal.slack.com/archives/C7AB68LJV/p1658504633952339 that is something i’ve noticed that many of the components differ from the drupal design system figma file. tinto noticed that as well and asked in a bit of different context during the frontend meeting today: https://drupal.slack.com/archives/C0D5GJZ8B/p1658851999365459?thread_ts=... but would that something to discuss during the other project browser meeting (the none site builder one) ? cuz there are still details. the checkbox look and feel. the search field outline . the buttons (therefor my question if buttons icons are only primary buttons or also regulary grey ones) , the chip design (that i’Ve already created an issue for). but there are many differing styling between the two figma style guides it looks like. (edited) |
| rkoller |
for reference. i’ve created the issues:#3300093: Improve the readability on individual module pages by limiting the line length |
Comments
Comment #6
leslieg commented