Re: Royale Doc Table-of-Contents UX (was Re: Royale Documentation Page Layout Proposal)

[Alex Harui]

OK, so to be clear, you are proposing replacing Jekyll with Gitbook.

It looked to me that Gitbook doesn't have as smooth a publishing
mechanism.  I'll go with whatever the majority wants to do, but I really
just want to focus on content instead of debating the merits of
alternatives to Gitbook.  We are already many hours in on Jekyll.  I think
it works well enough.  And we can control every pixel on the screen.

My 2 cents,
-Alex


On 1/29/18, 12:23 AM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
 wrote:

>On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 11:56 PM, Alex Harui 
>wrote:
>
>> I'm still confused.  I think we agreed to use GH Pages.  AFAICT, GH
>>Pages
>> uses Jekyll and Markdown.
>
>
>Jekyll is a general purpose static website generator.  Gitbook is built
>specifically for documentation.
>
>
>>   Jekyll expects a certain layout like templates
>> in a _layout folder.  I have put a template in there.  I don't
>>understand
>> using a different production system that doesn't use Jekyll and its way
>>of
>> laying out text.
>>
>
>
>You can publish to GH pages without using Jekyll:
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhelp.gith
>ub.com%2Farticles%2Fusing-a-static-site-generator-other-than-jekyll%2F
>a=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C0ebe0d56d8294e04a6ee08d566f1aaa1%7Cfa7b1b
>5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636528110492215042=GsI6eXK7%2F2
>zKtKHD2dsCQVQ5QbKwdyk4BeP4PWdGbKY%3D=0
>
>Here's how we can do it with Gitbook:
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fsangsoonam
>.github.io%2F2016%2F08%2F02%2Fpublish-gitbook-to-your-github-pages.html
>ta=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C0ebe0d56d8294e04a6ee08d566f1aaa1%7Cfa7b1
>b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636528110492215042=iVvLnTi96t%
>2BB9RzzJMbcga3Vk1vQymNPOSAC0y%2BzKoo%3D=0
>
>Thanks,
>Om
>
>
>>
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 1/28/18, 11:11 PM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash
>>Muppirala"
>>  wrote:
>>
>> >This does not use the Jekyll workflow.  This uses the .md files
>>directly.
>> >
>> >Thanks,
>> >Om
>> >
>> >On Jan 28, 2018 10:57 PM, "Alex Harui" 
>>wrote:
>> >
>> >I don’t get it.  There is a Jekyll template in our repo.  The link I
>>just
>> >clicked on did not appear to use it.
>> >
>> >-Alex
>> >
>> >On 1/28/18, 4:41 AM, "Andrew Wetmore"  wrote:
>> >
>> >>Yeah...the one thing it does not have is an expanding-collapsing ToC.
>>The
>> >>scrolling is not bad, but the intimidation effect of endless topic
>>titles
>> >>can be large. For me that is a usability negative...but not a
>> >>deal-killer.
>> >>
>> >>On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 7:35 AM, Gabe Harbs 
>> >>wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> BTW:
>> >>>
>> >>> That site has 3 levels in the table of contents:
>> >>>
>> >>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> https%3A%2F%2Fredux.j
>> >>>s
>> >>>.org%2Fdocs%2Frecipes%2Freducers%2FPrerequisiteConcepts.html&
>> data=02%7C0
>> >>>1
>> >>>%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c
>> 8547%7Cfa7b1b5a7b344
>> >>>3
>> >>>8794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636527401200834465=
>> 4Bdy4FThikLGQukS0S
>> >>>S
>> >>>d6DXKBbnoe0oMuSrJ%2BpxpHYw%3D=0 <
>> >>>
>> >>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> https%3A%2F%2Fredux.j
>> >>>s
>> >>>.org%2Fdocs%2Frecipes%2Freducers%2FPrerequisiteConcepts.html&
>> data=02%7C0
>> >>>1
>> >>>%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c
>> 8547%7Cfa7b1b5a7b344
>> >>>3
>> >>>8794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636527401200834465=
>> 4Bdy4FThikLGQukS0S
>> >>>S
>> >>>d6DXKBbnoe0oMuSrJ%2BpxpHYw%3D=0>
>> >>>
>> >>> > On Jan 28, 2018, at 1:20 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala
>> >>>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Here is a very good example of what the end product would look
>>like:
>> >>> >
>> >>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> https%3A%2F%2Fredux.j
>> >>>s
>> >>>.org%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> 7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c
>> >>>8
>> >>>547%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
>> 7C636527401200834465
>> >>>a
>> >>>=GrTlTr5PCqHK6qS9pg9dKcKyRtO6BJU1xpxLGzWYOsY%3D=0
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Thanks,
>> >>> > Om
>> >>> >
>> >>> > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 3:14 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala <
>> >>> bigosma...@gmail.com>
>> >>> > wrote:
>> >>> >
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 3:13 AM, Gabe Harbs
>>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> Is this an additional way of viewing the content or a
>>replacement
>> >>>for
>> >>> the
>> >>> >>> Jenkyll-produced site?
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> If it’s the former, I can’t see any reason why not.
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> It's an additional way.  It uses the .md files from the github
>>repo
>> >>>and
>> >>> >> builds its own site.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Thanks,
>> >>> >> Om
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> Harbs
>> >>> >>>
>> >>>  On Jan 28, 2018, at 

Re: Royale Doc Table-of-Contents UX (was Re: Royale Documentation Page Layout Proposal)

[OmPrakash Muppirala]

On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 11:56 PM, Alex Harui 
wrote:

> I'm still confused.  I think we agreed to use GH Pages.  AFAICT, GH Pages
> uses Jekyll and Markdown.


Jekyll is a general purpose static website generator.  Gitbook is built
specifically for documentation.


>   Jekyll expects a certain layout like templates
> in a _layout folder.  I have put a template in there.  I don't understand
> using a different production system that doesn't use Jekyll and its way of
> laying out text.
>


You can publish to GH pages without using Jekyll:
https://help.github.com/articles/using-a-static-site-generator-other-than-jekyll/

Here's how we can do it with Gitbook:
http://sangsoonam.github.io/2016/08/02/publish-gitbook-to-your-github-pages.html

Thanks,
Om


>
> -Alex
>
> On 1/28/18, 11:11 PM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
>  wrote:
>
> >This does not use the Jekyll workflow.  This uses the .md files directly.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Om
> >
> >On Jan 28, 2018 10:57 PM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
> >
> >I don’t get it.  There is a Jekyll template in our repo.  The link I just
> >clicked on did not appear to use it.
> >
> >-Alex
> >
> >On 1/28/18, 4:41 AM, "Andrew Wetmore"  wrote:
> >
> >>Yeah...the one thing it does not have is an expanding-collapsing ToC. The
> >>scrolling is not bad, but the intimidation effect of endless topic titles
> >>can be large. For me that is a usability negative...but not a
> >>deal-killer.
> >>
> >>On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 7:35 AM, Gabe Harbs 
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >>> BTW:
> >>>
> >>> That site has 3 levels in the table of contents:
> >>>
> >>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fredux.j
> >>>s
> >>>.org%2Fdocs%2Frecipes%2Freducers%2FPrerequisiteConcepts.html&
> data=02%7C0
> >>>1
> >>>%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c
> 8547%7Cfa7b1b5a7b344
> >>>3
> >>>8794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636527401200834465=
> 4Bdy4FThikLGQukS0S
> >>>S
> >>>d6DXKBbnoe0oMuSrJ%2BpxpHYw%3D=0 <
> >>>
> >>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fredux.j
> >>>s
> >>>.org%2Fdocs%2Frecipes%2Freducers%2FPrerequisiteConcepts.html&
> data=02%7C0
> >>>1
> >>>%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c
> 8547%7Cfa7b1b5a7b344
> >>>3
> >>>8794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636527401200834465=
> 4Bdy4FThikLGQukS0S
> >>>S
> >>>d6DXKBbnoe0oMuSrJ%2BpxpHYw%3D=0>
> >>>
> >>> > On Jan 28, 2018, at 1:20 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala
> >>>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > Here is a very good example of what the end product would look like:
> >>> >
> >>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fredux.j
> >>>s
> >>>.org%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c
> >>>8
> >>>547%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> 7C636527401200834465
> >>>a
> >>>=GrTlTr5PCqHK6qS9pg9dKcKyRtO6BJU1xpxLGzWYOsY%3D=0
> >>> >
> >>> > Thanks,
> >>> > Om
> >>> >
> >>> > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 3:14 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala <
> >>> bigosma...@gmail.com>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 3:13 AM, Gabe Harbs 
> >>> wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >>> Is this an additional way of viewing the content or a replacement
> >>>for
> >>> the
> >>> >>> Jenkyll-produced site?
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> If it’s the former, I can’t see any reason why not.
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> It's an additional way.  It uses the .md files from the github repo
> >>>and
> >>> >> builds its own site.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Thanks,
> >>> >> Om
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> Harbs
> >>> >>>
> >>>  On Jan 28, 2018, at 1:09 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala <
> >>> bigosma...@gmail.com>
> >>> >>> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>  I've been playing around with the tool: GitBook
> >>>[https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> www.gitbooks.io
> >>>=
> >>>02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c
> 8547%7Cfa7b1b
> >>>5
> >>>a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636527401200834465&
> sdata=VI3BEHW9v7G
> >>>P
> >>>nAlTOg2gEp%2FgLrF61UFUShsrxY1wG7I%3D=0]
> >>>  I was able to connect my personal fork of the royale-docs to my
> >>> >>> gitbooks.io
> >>>  account.  This way, all my .md files are automatically available
> >>>for
> >>> >>> Docs
> >>>  creation.
> >>> 
> >>>  Here is an example I created in a few minutes:
> >>> 
> >>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fbigosma
> >>>l
> >>>lm.gitbooks.io%2Froyale-docs-test2%2Fcontent%2Fv%2F&
> data=02%7C01%7Caharu
> >>>i
> >>>%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c
> 8547%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2
> >>>c
> >>>178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636527401200834465=
> wYN9q4TD9UFz8rwXmzoh8QDc16E
> >>>n
> >>>Q64NDLMa4XKvMdg%3D=0
> >>> >>> develop/Create%20An%20Application.html
> >>> 
> >>>  The advantages I see using this tool are:
> >>> 
> 

Re: Royale Documentation Page Layout Proposal

[Alex Harui]

AFAICT, a theme is a set of templates and styles.  We already have a
template and some styles.  Carlos has proposed some tweaks to the
template. I asked him to make one adjustment to his suggestions.  If
Carlos can provide the red graphic that goes along the top and the white
logo, I will adjust the template.  Then, as folks have time, they can
tweak the template and styles.

And then, we can focus on generating content.  I know you all want it to
look awesome, and I do too, but given that folks have limited time to
contribute, I think we just have to settle for "Ok" and incrementally work
towards "awesome".  The users we want to attract right now will have to
deal with less-than-perfect in many places, not just the way the doc
looks, and IMO, to them, the content is going to be way more important.

IMO, that's the Apache Way.

My 2 cents,
-Alex

On 1/28/18, 2:20 AM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira"
 wrote:

>Right, we should make this ourselves, but in the right way, using the
>right
>path designed for this.
>The wheel is already created so we should find how to make the wheel and
>not trying to reinvent it.
>
>In [1] seems to be the right steps to create a Jekyll theme from scratch.
>I
>think we should follow this, and configure our _config.yml with the
>published result.
>
>Before changing more in the page doc example I did in WP, I think we
>should
>follow this steps and try to make a theme with that and see the results.
>
>Carlos
>
>
>
>2018-01-28 8:02 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
>
>>
>>
>> On 1/27/18, 10:37 AM, "Gabe Harbs"  wrote:
>>
>> >Nice direction. I wonder if it makes sense to start with a Jekyll theme
>> >such as the Jekyll-doc-theme[1] and build off of that.
>>
>> IMO, no.  I just don't want to spend time chasing down the IP of all of
>> the bits of these themes.  They may say they are MIT, but who knows
>>about
>> some font or css they've borrowed from somewhere.  I think I've done a
>> pretty good replication of the Royale Website header and footer.  If we
>> can agree on what Carlos proposes or my suggested changes to it, I
>>think I
>> can have it ready in a couple of hours and then we can just produce
>> content instead of providing more surface for IP nitpickers.  I keep
>> hoping we will find a simple HTML implementation of what we want so we
>>can
>> replicate parts of it across all of our web pages, from royale.a.o to
>> royale-docs to asdoc and the TryItNow app.  If we keep using different
>> themes, we have to try to reproduce the commonality in each of those
>> themes.
>>
>> >The theme I linked to has the advantage of offering simple blogging
>> >capabilities as well.
>>
>> Jekyll was designed for blogs.  Again, I think I can take a proposal
>>from
>> Carlos and get it working in a couple of hours.
>>
>> Keep it simple.  Less process, more content.  We can get fancy later.
>>
>> My 2 cents,
>> -Alex
>>
>>
>
>
>-- 
>Carlos Rovira
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2
>Fcarlosrovira=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cdfeddfad2cc948670aa208d5
>6638e309%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636527316904064307
>data=pythUh148uvX7wjCkAXI5RgpXOxLzyjQobh83F35t5E%3D=0

Re: Royale Doc Table-of-Contents UX (was Re: Royale Documentation Page Layout Proposal)

[Piotr Zarzycki]

Yes we are agreed to use GH pages. I'm glad that is working with google,
but let's move forward with Jekyll. We have auto publications once we push
it. It is very convenient!

Thanks, Piotr

2018-01-29 8:56 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :

> I'm still confused.  I think we agreed to use GH Pages.  AFAICT, GH Pages
> uses Jekyll and Markdown.  Jekyll expects a certain layout like templates
> in a _layout folder.  I have put a template in there.  I don't understand
> using a different production system that doesn't use Jekyll and its way of
> laying out text.
>
> -Alex
>
> On 1/28/18, 11:11 PM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
>  wrote:
>
> >This does not use the Jekyll workflow.  This uses the .md files directly.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Om
> >
> >On Jan 28, 2018 10:57 PM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
> >
> >I don’t get it.  There is a Jekyll template in our repo.  The link I just
> >clicked on did not appear to use it.
> >
> >-Alex
> >
> >On 1/28/18, 4:41 AM, "Andrew Wetmore"  wrote:
> >
> >>Yeah...the one thing it does not have is an expanding-collapsing ToC. The
> >>scrolling is not bad, but the intimidation effect of endless topic titles
> >>can be large. For me that is a usability negative...but not a
> >>deal-killer.
> >>
> >>On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 7:35 AM, Gabe Harbs 
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >>> BTW:
> >>>
> >>> That site has 3 levels in the table of contents:
> >>>
> >>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fredux.j
> >>>s
> >>>.org%2Fdocs%2Frecipes%2Freducers%2FPrerequisiteConcepts.html&
> data=02%7C0
> >>>1
> >>>%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c
> 8547%7Cfa7b1b5a7b344
> >>>3
> >>>8794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636527401200834465=
> 4Bdy4FThikLGQukS0S
> >>>S
> >>>d6DXKBbnoe0oMuSrJ%2BpxpHYw%3D=0 <
> >>>
> >>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fredux.j
> >>>s
> >>>.org%2Fdocs%2Frecipes%2Freducers%2FPrerequisiteConcepts.html&
> data=02%7C0
> >>>1
> >>>%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c
> 8547%7Cfa7b1b5a7b344
> >>>3
> >>>8794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636527401200834465=
> 4Bdy4FThikLGQukS0S
> >>>S
> >>>d6DXKBbnoe0oMuSrJ%2BpxpHYw%3D=0>
> >>>
> >>> > On Jan 28, 2018, at 1:20 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala
> >>>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > Here is a very good example of what the end product would look like:
> >>> >
> >>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fredux.j
> >>>s
> >>>.org%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c
> >>>8
> >>>547%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> 7C636527401200834465
> >>>a
> >>>=GrTlTr5PCqHK6qS9pg9dKcKyRtO6BJU1xpxLGzWYOsY%3D=0
> >>> >
> >>> > Thanks,
> >>> > Om
> >>> >
> >>> > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 3:14 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala <
> >>> bigosma...@gmail.com>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 3:13 AM, Gabe Harbs 
> >>> wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >>> Is this an additional way of viewing the content or a replacement
> >>>for
> >>> the
> >>> >>> Jenkyll-produced site?
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> If it’s the former, I can’t see any reason why not.
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> It's an additional way.  It uses the .md files from the github repo
> >>>and
> >>> >> builds its own site.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Thanks,
> >>> >> Om
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> Harbs
> >>> >>>
> >>>  On Jan 28, 2018, at 1:09 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala <
> >>> bigosma...@gmail.com>
> >>> >>> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>  I've been playing around with the tool: GitBook
> >>>[https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> www.gitbooks.io
> >>>=
> >>>02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c
> 8547%7Cfa7b1b
> >>>5
> >>>a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636527401200834465&
> sdata=VI3BEHW9v7G
> >>>P
> >>>nAlTOg2gEp%2FgLrF61UFUShsrxY1wG7I%3D=0]
> >>>  I was able to connect my personal fork of the royale-docs to my
> >>> >>> gitbooks.io
> >>>  account.  This way, all my .md files are automatically available
> >>>for
> >>> >>> Docs
> >>>  creation.
> >>> 
> >>>  Here is an example I created in a few minutes:
> >>> 
> >>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fbigosma
> >>>l
> >>>lm.gitbooks.io%2Froyale-docs-test2%2Fcontent%2Fv%2F&
> data=02%7C01%7Caharu
> >>>i
> >>>%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c
> 8547%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2
> >>>c
> >>>178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636527401200834465=
> wYN9q4TD9UFz8rwXmzoh8QDc16E
> >>>n
> >>>Q64NDLMa4XKvMdg%3D=0
> >>> >>> develop/Create%20An%20Application.html
> >>> 
> >>>  The advantages I see using this tool are:
> >>> 
> >>>  * Seems to be a widely used tool for documentation these days.
> >>> >>> NPMjs.org,
> >>>  React, Redux, etc. use Gitbook
> >>>  * Two way sync between github and gitbook app.  That is, 

Re: Royale Doc Table-of-Contents UX (was Re: Royale Documentation Page Layout Proposal)

[Alex Harui]

I'm still confused.  I think we agreed to use GH Pages.  AFAICT, GH Pages
uses Jekyll and Markdown.  Jekyll expects a certain layout like templates
in a _layout folder.  I have put a template in there.  I don't understand
using a different production system that doesn't use Jekyll and its way of
laying out text.

-Alex

On 1/28/18, 11:11 PM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
 wrote:

>This does not use the Jekyll workflow.  This uses the .md files directly.
>
>Thanks,
>Om
>
>On Jan 28, 2018 10:57 PM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
>
>I don’t get it.  There is a Jekyll template in our repo.  The link I just
>clicked on did not appear to use it.
>
>-Alex
>
>On 1/28/18, 4:41 AM, "Andrew Wetmore"  wrote:
>
>>Yeah...the one thing it does not have is an expanding-collapsing ToC. The
>>scrolling is not bad, but the intimidation effect of endless topic titles
>>can be large. For me that is a usability negative...but not a
>>deal-killer.
>>
>>On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 7:35 AM, Gabe Harbs 
>>wrote:
>>
>>> BTW:
>>>
>>> That site has 3 levels in the table of contents:
>>>
>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fredux.j
>>>s
>>>.org%2Fdocs%2Frecipes%2Freducers%2FPrerequisiteConcepts.html=02%7C0
>>>1
>>>%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c8547%7Cfa7b1b5a7b344
>>>3
>>>8794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636527401200834465=4Bdy4FThikLGQukS0S
>>>S
>>>d6DXKBbnoe0oMuSrJ%2BpxpHYw%3D=0 <
>>>
>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fredux.j
>>>s
>>>.org%2Fdocs%2Frecipes%2Freducers%2FPrerequisiteConcepts.html=02%7C0
>>>1
>>>%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c8547%7Cfa7b1b5a7b344
>>>3
>>>8794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636527401200834465=4Bdy4FThikLGQukS0S
>>>S
>>>d6DXKBbnoe0oMuSrJ%2BpxpHYw%3D=0>
>>>
>>> > On Jan 28, 2018, at 1:20 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala
>>>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Here is a very good example of what the end product would look like:
>>> >
>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fredux.j
>>>s
>>>.org%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c
>>>8
>>>547%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636527401200834465
>>>a
>>>=GrTlTr5PCqHK6qS9pg9dKcKyRtO6BJU1xpxLGzWYOsY%3D=0
>>> >
>>> > Thanks,
>>> > Om
>>> >
>>> > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 3:14 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala <
>>> bigosma...@gmail.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 3:13 AM, Gabe Harbs 
>>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> Is this an additional way of viewing the content or a replacement
>>>for
>>> the
>>> >>> Jenkyll-produced site?
>>> >>>
>>> >>> If it’s the former, I can’t see any reason why not.
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >> It's an additional way.  It uses the .md files from the github repo
>>>and
>>> >> builds its own site.
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks,
>>> >> Om
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Harbs
>>> >>>
>>>  On Jan 28, 2018, at 1:09 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala <
>>> bigosma...@gmail.com>
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>  I've been playing around with the tool: GitBook
>>>[https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=www.gitbooks.io
>>>=
>>>02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c8547%7Cfa7b1b
>>>5
>>>a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636527401200834465=VI3BEHW9v7G
>>>P
>>>nAlTOg2gEp%2FgLrF61UFUShsrxY1wG7I%3D=0]
>>>  I was able to connect my personal fork of the royale-docs to my
>>> >>> gitbooks.io
>>>  account.  This way, all my .md files are automatically available
>>>for
>>> >>> Docs
>>>  creation.
>>> 
>>>  Here is an example I created in a few minutes:
>>> 
>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbigosma
>>>l
>>>lm.gitbooks.io%2Froyale-docs-test2%2Fcontent%2Fv%2F=02%7C01%7Caharu
>>>i
>>>%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c8547%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2
>>>c
>>>178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636527401200834465=wYN9q4TD9UFz8rwXmzoh8QDc16E
>>>n
>>>Q64NDLMa4XKvMdg%3D=0
>>> >>> develop/Create%20An%20Application.html
>>> 
>>>  The advantages I see using this tool are:
>>> 
>>>  * Seems to be a widely used tool for documentation these days.
>>> >>> NPMjs.org,
>>>  React, Redux, etc. use Gitbook
>>>  * Two way sync between github and gitbook app.  That is, you can
>>> create
>>> >>> an
>>>  .md file on github and see it on gitbook.  You can also create
>>>more
>>> >>> content
>>>  using the WYSIWYG editor on Gitbook, which will be synced to the
>>> github
>>>  repo.
>>>  * Seems pretty straightforward to create a TOC.  It includes
>>>support
>>> for
>>>  tree structure by default
>>>  * We can choose to use the web app on gitbook.com or use the open
>>>  source(Apache V2 licensed |
>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.
>>>c

Re: Royale Doc Table-of-Contents UX (was Re: Royale Documentation Page Layout Proposal)

[OmPrakash Muppirala]

This does not use the Jekyll workflow.  This uses the .md files directly.

Thanks,
Om

On Jan 28, 2018 10:57 PM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:

I don’t get it.  There is a Jekyll template in our repo.  The link I just
clicked on did not appear to use it.

-Alex

On 1/28/18, 4:41 AM, "Andrew Wetmore"  wrote:

>Yeah...the one thing it does not have is an expanding-collapsing ToC. The
>scrolling is not bad, but the intimidation effect of endless topic titles
>can be large. For me that is a usability negative...but not a deal-killer.
>
>On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 7:35 AM, Gabe Harbs  wrote:
>
>> BTW:
>>
>> That site has 3 levels in the table of contents:
>>
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fredux.js
>>.org%2Fdocs%2Frecipes%2Freducers%2FPrerequisiteConcepts.html=02%7C01
>>%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c8547%7Cfa7b1b5a7b3443
>>8794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636527401200834465=4Bdy4FThikLGQukS0SS
>>d6DXKBbnoe0oMuSrJ%2BpxpHYw%3D=0 <
>>
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fredux.js
>>.org%2Fdocs%2Frecipes%2Freducers%2FPrerequisiteConcepts.html=02%7C01
>>%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c8547%7Cfa7b1b5a7b3443
>>8794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636527401200834465=4Bdy4FThikLGQukS0SS
>>d6DXKBbnoe0oMuSrJ%2BpxpHYw%3D=0>
>>
>> > On Jan 28, 2018, at 1:20 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala
>>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Here is a very good example of what the end product would look like:
>> >
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fredux.js
>>.org%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c8
>>547%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636527401200834465
>>=GrTlTr5PCqHK6qS9pg9dKcKyRtO6BJU1xpxLGzWYOsY%3D=0
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Om
>> >
>> > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 3:14 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala <
>> bigosma...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 3:13 AM, Gabe Harbs 
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Is this an additional way of viewing the content or a replacement
>>for
>> the
>> >>> Jenkyll-produced site?
>> >>>
>> >>> If it’s the former, I can’t see any reason why not.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> It's an additional way.  It uses the .md files from the github repo
>>and
>> >> builds its own site.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Om
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> Harbs
>> >>>
>>  On Jan 28, 2018, at 1:09 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala <
>> bigosma...@gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> 
>>  I've been playing around with the tool: GitBook
>>[https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=www.gitbooks.io=
>>02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c8547%7Cfa7b1b5
>>a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636527401200834465=VI3BEHW9v7GP
>>nAlTOg2gEp%2FgLrF61UFUShsrxY1wG7I%3D=0]
>>  I was able to connect my personal fork of the royale-docs to my
>> >>> gitbooks.io
>>  account.  This way, all my .md files are automatically available
>>for
>> >>> Docs
>>  creation.
>> 
>>  Here is an example I created in a few minutes:
>> 
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbigosmal
>>lm.gitbooks.io%2Froyale-docs-test2%2Fcontent%2Fv%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui
>>%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c8547%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c
>>178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636527401200834465=wYN9q4TD9UFz8rwXmzoh8QDc16En
>>Q64NDLMa4XKvMdg%3D=0
>> >>> develop/Create%20An%20Application.html
>> 
>>  The advantages I see using this tool are:
>> 
>>  * Seems to be a widely used tool for documentation these days.
>> >>> NPMjs.org,
>>  React, Redux, etc. use Gitbook
>>  * Two way sync between github and gitbook app.  That is, you can
>> create
>> >>> an
>>  .md file on github and see it on gitbook.  You can also create more
>> >>> content
>>  using the WYSIWYG editor on Gitbook, which will be synced to the
>> github
>>  repo.
>>  * Seems pretty straightforward to create a TOC.  It includes
>>support
>> for
>>  tree structure by default
>>  * We can choose to use the web app on gitbook.com or use the open
>>  source(Apache V2 licensed |
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.c
>>om%2FGitbookIO%2Fgitbook=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c474380
>>4324141308d5664c8547%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365274
>>01200834465=9yrCy9F6C7auYCI%2FEjfdLi8gTkkma%2FN4rURUrFDU%2FZI%3D
>>served=0)
>> >>> command
>>  line tool.  The CLI will help us integrate with our Jenkins build
>>for
>>  example.
>>  * Allows users to provide feedback on the site itself
>>  * Allows us to point the docs site to our custom domain address
>> 
>> 
>>  If there is more interest in trying this out, I can set up an
>> >>> Organization
>>  account (free) and add users as needed.
>> 
>>  Thanks,
>>  Om
>> 
>>  On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 2:53 AM, Andrew Wetmore

Re: Royale Doc Table-of-Contents UX (was Re: Royale Documentation Page Layout Proposal)

[Alex Harui]

I don’t get it.  There is a Jekyll template in our repo.  The link I just
clicked on did not appear to use it.

-Alex

On 1/28/18, 4:41 AM, "Andrew Wetmore"  wrote:

>Yeah...the one thing it does not have is an expanding-collapsing ToC. The
>scrolling is not bad, but the intimidation effect of endless topic titles
>can be large. For me that is a usability negative...but not a deal-killer.
>
>On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 7:35 AM, Gabe Harbs  wrote:
>
>> BTW:
>>
>> That site has 3 levels in the table of contents:
>> 
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fredux.js
>>.org%2Fdocs%2Frecipes%2Freducers%2FPrerequisiteConcepts.html=02%7C01
>>%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c8547%7Cfa7b1b5a7b3443
>>8794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636527401200834465=4Bdy4FThikLGQukS0SS
>>d6DXKBbnoe0oMuSrJ%2BpxpHYw%3D=0 <
>> 
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fredux.js
>>.org%2Fdocs%2Frecipes%2Freducers%2FPrerequisiteConcepts.html=02%7C01
>>%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c8547%7Cfa7b1b5a7b3443
>>8794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636527401200834465=4Bdy4FThikLGQukS0SS
>>d6DXKBbnoe0oMuSrJ%2BpxpHYw%3D=0>
>>
>> > On Jan 28, 2018, at 1:20 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala
>>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Here is a very good example of what the end product would look like:
>> > 
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fredux.js
>>.org%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c8
>>547%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636527401200834465
>>=GrTlTr5PCqHK6qS9pg9dKcKyRtO6BJU1xpxLGzWYOsY%3D=0
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Om
>> >
>> > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 3:14 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala <
>> bigosma...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 3:13 AM, Gabe Harbs 
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Is this an additional way of viewing the content or a replacement
>>for
>> the
>> >>> Jenkyll-produced site?
>> >>>
>> >>> If it’s the former, I can’t see any reason why not.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> It's an additional way.  It uses the .md files from the github repo
>>and
>> >> builds its own site.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Om
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> Harbs
>> >>>
>>  On Jan 28, 2018, at 1:09 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala <
>> bigosma...@gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> 
>>  I've been playing around with the tool: GitBook
>>[https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=www.gitbooks.io=
>>02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c8547%7Cfa7b1b5
>>a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636527401200834465=VI3BEHW9v7GP
>>nAlTOg2gEp%2FgLrF61UFUShsrxY1wG7I%3D=0]
>>  I was able to connect my personal fork of the royale-docs to my
>> >>> gitbooks.io
>>  account.  This way, all my .md files are automatically available
>>for
>> >>> Docs
>>  creation.
>> 
>>  Here is an example I created in a few minutes:
>>  
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbigosmal
>>lm.gitbooks.io%2Froyale-docs-test2%2Fcontent%2Fv%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui
>>%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c4743804324141308d5664c8547%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c
>>178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636527401200834465=wYN9q4TD9UFz8rwXmzoh8QDc16En
>>Q64NDLMa4XKvMdg%3D=0
>> >>> develop/Create%20An%20Application.html
>> 
>>  The advantages I see using this tool are:
>> 
>>  * Seems to be a widely used tool for documentation these days.
>> >>> NPMjs.org,
>>  React, Redux, etc. use Gitbook
>>  * Two way sync between github and gitbook app.  That is, you can
>> create
>> >>> an
>>  .md file on github and see it on gitbook.  You can also create more
>> >>> content
>>  using the WYSIWYG editor on Gitbook, which will be synced to the
>> github
>>  repo.
>>  * Seems pretty straightforward to create a TOC.  It includes
>>support
>> for
>>  tree structure by default
>>  * We can choose to use the web app on gitbook.com or use the open
>>  source(Apache V2 licensed |
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.c
>>om%2FGitbookIO%2Fgitbook=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce35c7c474380
>>4324141308d5664c8547%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365274
>>01200834465=9yrCy9F6C7auYCI%2FEjfdLi8gTkkma%2FN4rURUrFDU%2FZI%3D
>>served=0)
>> >>> command
>>  line tool.  The CLI will help us integrate with our Jenkins build
>>for
>>  example.
>>  * Allows users to provide feedback on the site itself
>>  * Allows us to point the docs site to our custom domain address
>> 
>> 
>>  If there is more interest in trying this out, I can set up an
>> >>> Organization
>>  account (free) and add users as needed.
>> 
>>  Thanks,
>>  Om
>> 
>>  On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 2:53 AM, Andrew Wetmore
>>
>> >>> wrote:
>> 
>> > If the ToC accordions properly and we need three levels, I do not
>>see
>> >>> why
>> > three levels would 

Re: Royale Doc Table-of-Contents UX (was Re: Royale Documentation Page Layout Proposal)

[Andrew Wetmore]

Yeah...the one thing it does not have is an expanding-collapsing ToC. The
scrolling is not bad, but the intimidation effect of endless topic titles
can be large. For me that is a usability negative...but not a deal-killer.

On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 7:35 AM, Gabe Harbs  wrote:

> BTW:
>
> That site has 3 levels in the table of contents:
> https://redux.js.org/docs/recipes/reducers/PrerequisiteConcepts.html <
> https://redux.js.org/docs/recipes/reducers/PrerequisiteConcepts.html>
>
> > On Jan 28, 2018, at 1:20 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala 
> wrote:
> >
> > Here is a very good example of what the end product would look like:
> > https://redux.js.org/
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Om
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 3:14 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala <
> bigosma...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 3:13 AM, Gabe Harbs 
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Is this an additional way of viewing the content or a replacement for
> the
> >>> Jenkyll-produced site?
> >>>
> >>> If it’s the former, I can’t see any reason why not.
> >>>
> >>
> >> It's an additional way.  It uses the .md files from the github repo and
> >> builds its own site.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Om
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Harbs
> >>>
>  On Jan 28, 2018, at 1:09 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala <
> bigosma...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> 
>  I've been playing around with the tool: GitBook [www.gitbooks.io]
>  I was able to connect my personal fork of the royale-docs to my
> >>> gitbooks.io
>  account.  This way, all my .md files are automatically available for
> >>> Docs
>  creation.
> 
>  Here is an example I created in a few minutes:
>  https://bigosmallm.gitbooks.io/royale-docs-test2/content/v/
> >>> develop/Create%20An%20Application.html
> 
>  The advantages I see using this tool are:
> 
>  * Seems to be a widely used tool for documentation these days.
> >>> NPMjs.org,
>  React, Redux, etc. use Gitbook
>  * Two way sync between github and gitbook app.  That is, you can
> create
> >>> an
>  .md file on github and see it on gitbook.  You can also create more
> >>> content
>  using the WYSIWYG editor on Gitbook, which will be synced to the
> github
>  repo.
>  * Seems pretty straightforward to create a TOC.  It includes support
> for
>  tree structure by default
>  * We can choose to use the web app on gitbook.com or use the open
>  source(Apache V2 licensed | https://github.com/GitbookIO/gitbook)
> >>> command
>  line tool.  The CLI will help us integrate with our Jenkins build for
>  example.
>  * Allows users to provide feedback on the site itself
>  * Allows us to point the docs site to our custom domain address
> 
> 
>  If there is more interest in trying this out, I can set up an
> >>> Organization
>  account (free) and add users as needed.
> 
>  Thanks,
>  Om
> 
>  On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 2:53 AM, Andrew Wetmore 
> >>> wrote:
> 
> > If the ToC accordions properly and we need three levels, I do not see
> >>> why
> > three levels would cause more confusion than two levels. If this is a
> > resource providing information people are going to need to use
> Royale,
> >>> and
> > if that information is not readily available elsewhere, then we
> should
> >>> make
> > the ToC fit the information, not the other way around.
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 5:56 AM, Carlos Rovira <
> >>> carlosrov...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Alex,
> >>
> >> for TOC. One think that's very important to me: Please only *two
> >>> levels*
> > in
> >> TOC. For simplicity and clarity. Like the demo page I did. It's the
> >> standard right now and a three level only created confusion. Again
> see
> >> Angular and React sites to match what they did and take it as a
> > reference.
> >>
> >> For states. I think the trick here is that a .md page has some
> >>> variables
> >> that will make the right top level branch open in TOC and as well
> make
> > the
> >> right sub option appears as selected (strong type) and without link.
> >>> As
> > we
> >> are dealing with static GitHub pages I think there's no concept of
> >> component, only that all pages has the TOC added to the sidebar.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2018-01-27 1:18 GMT+01:00 Andrew Wetmore :
> >>
> >>> What you describe sounds fine to me. I don't think we need to worry
> > about
> >>> breadcrumbs and state and helping people go backwards through their
> >> series
> >>> of clicks.
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 8:09 PM, Alex Harui
>  
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
>  Breaking out a separate thread on this...
> 
>  Thinking about this some more, I think I can generate an
> interactive
>  

Re: Royale Doc Table-of-Contents UX (was Re: Royale Documentation Page Layout Proposal)

[Gabe Harbs]

BTW:

That site has 3 levels in the table of contents:
https://redux.js.org/docs/recipes/reducers/PrerequisiteConcepts.html 


> On Jan 28, 2018, at 1:20 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala  wrote:
> 
> Here is a very good example of what the end product would look like:
> https://redux.js.org/
> 
> Thanks,
> Om
> 
> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 3:14 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala 
> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 3:13 AM, Gabe Harbs  wrote:
>> 
>>> Is this an additional way of viewing the content or a replacement for the
>>> Jenkyll-produced site?
>>> 
>>> If it’s the former, I can’t see any reason why not.
>>> 
>> 
>> It's an additional way.  It uses the .md files from the github repo and
>> builds its own site.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Om
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> Harbs
>>> 
 On Jan 28, 2018, at 1:09 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala 
>>> wrote:
 
 I've been playing around with the tool: GitBook [www.gitbooks.io]
 I was able to connect my personal fork of the royale-docs to my
>>> gitbooks.io
 account.  This way, all my .md files are automatically available for
>>> Docs
 creation.
 
 Here is an example I created in a few minutes:
 https://bigosmallm.gitbooks.io/royale-docs-test2/content/v/
>>> develop/Create%20An%20Application.html
 
 The advantages I see using this tool are:
 
 * Seems to be a widely used tool for documentation these days.
>>> NPMjs.org,
 React, Redux, etc. use Gitbook
 * Two way sync between github and gitbook app.  That is, you can create
>>> an
 .md file on github and see it on gitbook.  You can also create more
>>> content
 using the WYSIWYG editor on Gitbook, which will be synced to the github
 repo.
 * Seems pretty straightforward to create a TOC.  It includes support for
 tree structure by default
 * We can choose to use the web app on gitbook.com or use the open
 source(Apache V2 licensed | https://github.com/GitbookIO/gitbook)
>>> command
 line tool.  The CLI will help us integrate with our Jenkins build for
 example.
 * Allows users to provide feedback on the site itself
 * Allows us to point the docs site to our custom domain address
 
 
 If there is more interest in trying this out, I can set up an
>>> Organization
 account (free) and add users as needed.
 
 Thanks,
 Om
 
 On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 2:53 AM, Andrew Wetmore 
>>> wrote:
 
> If the ToC accordions properly and we need three levels, I do not see
>>> why
> three levels would cause more confusion than two levels. If this is a
> resource providing information people are going to need to use Royale,
>>> and
> if that information is not readily available elsewhere, then we should
>>> make
> the ToC fit the information, not the other way around.
> 
> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 5:56 AM, Carlos Rovira <
>>> carlosrov...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Alex,
>> 
>> for TOC. One think that's very important to me: Please only *two
>>> levels*
> in
>> TOC. For simplicity and clarity. Like the demo page I did. It's the
>> standard right now and a three level only created confusion. Again see
>> Angular and React sites to match what they did and take it as a
> reference.
>> 
>> For states. I think the trick here is that a .md page has some
>>> variables
>> that will make the right top level branch open in TOC and as well make
> the
>> right sub option appears as selected (strong type) and without link.
>>> As
> we
>> are dealing with static GitHub pages I think there's no concept of
>> component, only that all pages has the TOC added to the sidebar.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 2018-01-27 1:18 GMT+01:00 Andrew Wetmore :
>> 
>>> What you describe sounds fine to me. I don't think we need to worry
> about
>>> breadcrumbs and state and helping people go backwards through their
>> series
>>> of clicks.
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 8:09 PM, Alex Harui >> wrote:
>>> 
 Breaking out a separate thread on this...
 
 Thinking about this some more, I think I can generate an interactive
 control with Jekyll, but I don't know how to make it retain state.
>>> I
 think that might require cookies and/or frames.
 
 For example, let's say the TOC looked like:
 
 Welcome
 --High Level View
 --Features
 AS3
 MXML
 Get Started
 --Download
 --Hello World
 
 I've already implemented logic in the template to auto-expand the
> tree
>> to
 the document for folks who have direct links.  So, if you do a
>>> Google

Re: Royale Doc Table-of-Contents UX (was Re: Royale Documentation Page Layout Proposal)

[Gabe Harbs]

I’d say “go for it”!

> On Jan 28, 2018, at 1:20 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala  wrote:
> 
> Here is a very good example of what the end product would look like:
> https://redux.js.org/
> 
> Thanks,
> Om
> 
> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 3:14 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala 
> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 3:13 AM, Gabe Harbs  wrote:
>> 
>>> Is this an additional way of viewing the content or a replacement for the
>>> Jenkyll-produced site?
>>> 
>>> If it’s the former, I can’t see any reason why not.
>>> 
>> 
>> It's an additional way.  It uses the .md files from the github repo and
>> builds its own site.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Om
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> Harbs
>>> 
 On Jan 28, 2018, at 1:09 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala 
>>> wrote:
 
 I've been playing around with the tool: GitBook [www.gitbooks.io]
 I was able to connect my personal fork of the royale-docs to my
>>> gitbooks.io
 account.  This way, all my .md files are automatically available for
>>> Docs
 creation.
 
 Here is an example I created in a few minutes:
 https://bigosmallm.gitbooks.io/royale-docs-test2/content/v/
>>> develop/Create%20An%20Application.html
 
 The advantages I see using this tool are:
 
 * Seems to be a widely used tool for documentation these days.
>>> NPMjs.org,
 React, Redux, etc. use Gitbook
 * Two way sync between github and gitbook app.  That is, you can create
>>> an
 .md file on github and see it on gitbook.  You can also create more
>>> content
 using the WYSIWYG editor on Gitbook, which will be synced to the github
 repo.
 * Seems pretty straightforward to create a TOC.  It includes support for
 tree structure by default
 * We can choose to use the web app on gitbook.com or use the open
 source(Apache V2 licensed | https://github.com/GitbookIO/gitbook)
>>> command
 line tool.  The CLI will help us integrate with our Jenkins build for
 example.
 * Allows users to provide feedback on the site itself
 * Allows us to point the docs site to our custom domain address
 
 
 If there is more interest in trying this out, I can set up an
>>> Organization
 account (free) and add users as needed.
 
 Thanks,
 Om
 
 On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 2:53 AM, Andrew Wetmore 
>>> wrote:
 
> If the ToC accordions properly and we need three levels, I do not see
>>> why
> three levels would cause more confusion than two levels. If this is a
> resource providing information people are going to need to use Royale,
>>> and
> if that information is not readily available elsewhere, then we should
>>> make
> the ToC fit the information, not the other way around.
> 
> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 5:56 AM, Carlos Rovira <
>>> carlosrov...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Alex,
>> 
>> for TOC. One think that's very important to me: Please only *two
>>> levels*
> in
>> TOC. For simplicity and clarity. Like the demo page I did. It's the
>> standard right now and a three level only created confusion. Again see
>> Angular and React sites to match what they did and take it as a
> reference.
>> 
>> For states. I think the trick here is that a .md page has some
>>> variables
>> that will make the right top level branch open in TOC and as well make
> the
>> right sub option appears as selected (strong type) and without link.
>>> As
> we
>> are dealing with static GitHub pages I think there's no concept of
>> component, only that all pages has the TOC added to the sidebar.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 2018-01-27 1:18 GMT+01:00 Andrew Wetmore :
>> 
>>> What you describe sounds fine to me. I don't think we need to worry
> about
>>> breadcrumbs and state and helping people go backwards through their
>> series
>>> of clicks.
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 8:09 PM, Alex Harui >> wrote:
>>> 
 Breaking out a separate thread on this...
 
 Thinking about this some more, I think I can generate an interactive
 control with Jekyll, but I don't know how to make it retain state.
>>> I
 think that might require cookies and/or frames.
 
 For example, let's say the TOC looked like:
 
 Welcome
 --High Level View
 --Features
 AS3
 MXML
 Get Started
 --Download
 --Hello World
 
 I've already implemented logic in the template to auto-expand the
> tree
>> to
 the document for folks who have direct links.  So, if you do a
>>> Google
 Search and find the link to the MXML page, when you go to that page,
>> the
 ToC will automatically look like:
 
 Welcome
 --High 

Re: Royale Doc Table-of-Contents UX (was Re: Royale Documentation Page Layout Proposal)

[OmPrakash Muppirala]

Here is a very good example of what the end product would look like:
https://redux.js.org/

Thanks,
Om

On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 3:14 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala 
wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 3:13 AM, Gabe Harbs  wrote:
>
>> Is this an additional way of viewing the content or a replacement for the
>> Jenkyll-produced site?
>>
>> If it’s the former, I can’t see any reason why not.
>>
>
> It's an additional way.  It uses the .md files from the github repo and
> builds its own site.
>
> Thanks,
> Om
>
>
>>
>> Harbs
>>
>> > On Jan 28, 2018, at 1:09 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > I've been playing around with the tool: GitBook [www.gitbooks.io]
>> > I was able to connect my personal fork of the royale-docs to my
>> gitbooks.io
>> > account.  This way, all my .md files are automatically available for
>> Docs
>> > creation.
>> >
>> > Here is an example I created in a few minutes:
>> > https://bigosmallm.gitbooks.io/royale-docs-test2/content/v/
>> develop/Create%20An%20Application.html
>> >
>> > The advantages I see using this tool are:
>> >
>> > * Seems to be a widely used tool for documentation these days.
>> NPMjs.org,
>> > React, Redux, etc. use Gitbook
>> > * Two way sync between github and gitbook app.  That is, you can create
>> an
>> > .md file on github and see it on gitbook.  You can also create more
>> content
>> > using the WYSIWYG editor on Gitbook, which will be synced to the github
>> > repo.
>> > * Seems pretty straightforward to create a TOC.  It includes support for
>> > tree structure by default
>> > * We can choose to use the web app on gitbook.com or use the open
>> > source(Apache V2 licensed | https://github.com/GitbookIO/gitbook)
>> command
>> > line tool.  The CLI will help us integrate with our Jenkins build for
>> > example.
>> > * Allows users to provide feedback on the site itself
>> > * Allows us to point the docs site to our custom domain address
>> >
>> >
>> > If there is more interest in trying this out, I can set up an
>> Organization
>> > account (free) and add users as needed.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Om
>> >
>> > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 2:53 AM, Andrew Wetmore 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> If the ToC accordions properly and we need three levels, I do not see
>> why
>> >> three levels would cause more confusion than two levels. If this is a
>> >> resource providing information people are going to need to use Royale,
>> and
>> >> if that information is not readily available elsewhere, then we should
>> make
>> >> the ToC fit the information, not the other way around.
>> >>
>> >> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 5:56 AM, Carlos Rovira <
>> carlosrov...@apache.org>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Hi Alex,
>> >>>
>> >>> for TOC. One think that's very important to me: Please only *two
>> levels*
>> >> in
>> >>> TOC. For simplicity and clarity. Like the demo page I did. It's the
>> >>> standard right now and a three level only created confusion. Again see
>> >>> Angular and React sites to match what they did and take it as a
>> >> reference.
>> >>>
>> >>> For states. I think the trick here is that a .md page has some
>> variables
>> >>> that will make the right top level branch open in TOC and as well make
>> >> the
>> >>> right sub option appears as selected (strong type) and without link.
>> As
>> >> we
>> >>> are dealing with static GitHub pages I think there's no concept of
>> >>> component, only that all pages has the TOC added to the sidebar.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> 2018-01-27 1:18 GMT+01:00 Andrew Wetmore :
>> >>>
>>  What you describe sounds fine to me. I don't think we need to worry
>> >> about
>>  breadcrumbs and state and helping people go backwards through their
>> >>> series
>>  of clicks.
>> 
>>  On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 8:09 PM, Alex Harui > >
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> > Breaking out a separate thread on this...
>> >
>> > Thinking about this some more, I think I can generate an interactive
>> > control with Jekyll, but I don't know how to make it retain state.
>> I
>> > think that might require cookies and/or frames.
>> >
>> > For example, let's say the TOC looked like:
>> >
>> > Welcome
>> > --High Level View
>> > --Features
>> > AS3
>> > MXML
>> > Get Started
>> > --Download
>> > --Hello World
>> >
>> > I've already implemented logic in the template to auto-expand the
>> >> tree
>> >>> to
>> > the document for folks who have direct links.  So, if you do a
>> Google
>> > Search and find the link to the MXML page, when you go to that page,
>> >>> the
>> > ToC will automatically look like:
>> >
>> > Welcome
>> > --High Level View
>> > --Features
>> > AS3
>> > ---*MXML*
>> > Get Started
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > If you hit the main doc page, the ToC starts out collapsed so that
>> >> Get
>> 

Re: Royale Doc Table-of-Contents UX (was Re: Royale Documentation Page Layout Proposal)

[OmPrakash Muppirala]

On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 3:13 AM, Gabe Harbs  wrote:

> Is this an additional way of viewing the content or a replacement for the
> Jenkyll-produced site?
>
> If it’s the former, I can’t see any reason why not.
>

It's an additional way.  It uses the .md files from the github repo and
builds its own site.

Thanks,
Om


>
> Harbs
>
> > On Jan 28, 2018, at 1:09 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala 
> wrote:
> >
> > I've been playing around with the tool: GitBook [www.gitbooks.io]
> > I was able to connect my personal fork of the royale-docs to my
> gitbooks.io
> > account.  This way, all my .md files are automatically available for Docs
> > creation.
> >
> > Here is an example I created in a few minutes:
> > https://bigosmallm.gitbooks.io/royale-docs-test2/content/
> v/develop/Create%20An%20Application.html
> >
> > The advantages I see using this tool are:
> >
> > * Seems to be a widely used tool for documentation these days.
> NPMjs.org,
> > React, Redux, etc. use Gitbook
> > * Two way sync between github and gitbook app.  That is, you can create
> an
> > .md file on github and see it on gitbook.  You can also create more
> content
> > using the WYSIWYG editor on Gitbook, which will be synced to the github
> > repo.
> > * Seems pretty straightforward to create a TOC.  It includes support for
> > tree structure by default
> > * We can choose to use the web app on gitbook.com or use the open
> > source(Apache V2 licensed | https://github.com/GitbookIO/gitbook)
> command
> > line tool.  The CLI will help us integrate with our Jenkins build for
> > example.
> > * Allows users to provide feedback on the site itself
> > * Allows us to point the docs site to our custom domain address
> >
> >
> > If there is more interest in trying this out, I can set up an
> Organization
> > account (free) and add users as needed.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Om
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 2:53 AM, Andrew Wetmore 
> wrote:
> >
> >> If the ToC accordions properly and we need three levels, I do not see
> why
> >> three levels would cause more confusion than two levels. If this is a
> >> resource providing information people are going to need to use Royale,
> and
> >> if that information is not readily available elsewhere, then we should
> make
> >> the ToC fit the information, not the other way around.
> >>
> >> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 5:56 AM, Carlos Rovira  >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi Alex,
> >>>
> >>> for TOC. One think that's very important to me: Please only *two
> levels*
> >> in
> >>> TOC. For simplicity and clarity. Like the demo page I did. It's the
> >>> standard right now and a three level only created confusion. Again see
> >>> Angular and React sites to match what they did and take it as a
> >> reference.
> >>>
> >>> For states. I think the trick here is that a .md page has some
> variables
> >>> that will make the right top level branch open in TOC and as well make
> >> the
> >>> right sub option appears as selected (strong type) and without link. As
> >> we
> >>> are dealing with static GitHub pages I think there's no concept of
> >>> component, only that all pages has the TOC added to the sidebar.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 2018-01-27 1:18 GMT+01:00 Andrew Wetmore :
> >>>
>  What you describe sounds fine to me. I don't think we need to worry
> >> about
>  breadcrumbs and state and helping people go backwards through their
> >>> series
>  of clicks.
> 
>  On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 8:09 PM, Alex Harui  >
>  wrote:
> 
> > Breaking out a separate thread on this...
> >
> > Thinking about this some more, I think I can generate an interactive
> > control with Jekyll, but I don't know how to make it retain state.  I
> > think that might require cookies and/or frames.
> >
> > For example, let's say the TOC looked like:
> >
> > Welcome
> > --High Level View
> > --Features
> > AS3
> > MXML
> > Get Started
> > --Download
> > --Hello World
> >
> > I've already implemented logic in the template to auto-expand the
> >> tree
> >>> to
> > the document for folks who have direct links.  So, if you do a Google
> > Search and find the link to the MXML page, when you go to that page,
> >>> the
> > ToC will automatically look like:
> >
> > Welcome
> > --High Level View
> > --Features
> > AS3
> > ---*MXML*
> > Get Started
> >
> >
> >
> > If you hit the main doc page, the ToC starts out collapsed so that
> >> Get
> > Started isn't pushed down by a bunch of Welcome sub-topics.  So the
> >> ToC
> > initially looks like:
> >
> > Welcome
> > Get Started
> >
> > Now let's say you expand both Welcome and Get Started so you see:
> >
> > Welcome
> > --High Level View
> > --Features
> > Get Started
> > --Download
> 

Re: Royale Doc Table-of-Contents UX (was Re: Royale Documentation Page Layout Proposal)

[Gabe Harbs]

Is this an additional way of viewing the content or a replacement for the 
Jenkyll-produced site?

If it’s the former, I can’t see any reason why not.

Harbs

> On Jan 28, 2018, at 1:09 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala  wrote:
> 
> I've been playing around with the tool: GitBook [www.gitbooks.io]
> I was able to connect my personal fork of the royale-docs to my gitbooks.io
> account.  This way, all my .md files are automatically available for Docs
> creation.
> 
> Here is an example I created in a few minutes:
> https://bigosmallm.gitbooks.io/royale-docs-test2/content/v/develop/Create%20An%20Application.html
> 
> The advantages I see using this tool are:
> 
> * Seems to be a widely used tool for documentation these days.  NPMjs.org,
> React, Redux, etc. use Gitbook
> * Two way sync between github and gitbook app.  That is, you can create an
> .md file on github and see it on gitbook.  You can also create more content
> using the WYSIWYG editor on Gitbook, which will be synced to the github
> repo.
> * Seems pretty straightforward to create a TOC.  It includes support for
> tree structure by default
> * We can choose to use the web app on gitbook.com or use the open
> source(Apache V2 licensed | https://github.com/GitbookIO/gitbook) command
> line tool.  The CLI will help us integrate with our Jenkins build for
> example.
> * Allows users to provide feedback on the site itself
> * Allows us to point the docs site to our custom domain address
> 
> 
> If there is more interest in trying this out, I can set up an Organization
> account (free) and add users as needed.
> 
> Thanks,
> Om
> 
> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 2:53 AM, Andrew Wetmore  wrote:
> 
>> If the ToC accordions properly and we need three levels, I do not see why
>> three levels would cause more confusion than two levels. If this is a
>> resource providing information people are going to need to use Royale, and
>> if that information is not readily available elsewhere, then we should make
>> the ToC fit the information, not the other way around.
>> 
>> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 5:56 AM, Carlos Rovira 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Alex,
>>> 
>>> for TOC. One think that's very important to me: Please only *two levels*
>> in
>>> TOC. For simplicity and clarity. Like the demo page I did. It's the
>>> standard right now and a three level only created confusion. Again see
>>> Angular and React sites to match what they did and take it as a
>> reference.
>>> 
>>> For states. I think the trick here is that a .md page has some variables
>>> that will make the right top level branch open in TOC and as well make
>> the
>>> right sub option appears as selected (strong type) and without link. As
>> we
>>> are dealing with static GitHub pages I think there's no concept of
>>> component, only that all pages has the TOC added to the sidebar.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 2018-01-27 1:18 GMT+01:00 Andrew Wetmore :
>>> 
 What you describe sounds fine to me. I don't think we need to worry
>> about
 breadcrumbs and state and helping people go backwards through their
>>> series
 of clicks.
 
 On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 8:09 PM, Alex Harui 
 wrote:
 
> Breaking out a separate thread on this...
> 
> Thinking about this some more, I think I can generate an interactive
> control with Jekyll, but I don't know how to make it retain state.  I
> think that might require cookies and/or frames.
> 
> For example, let's say the TOC looked like:
> 
> Welcome
> --High Level View
> --Features
> AS3
> MXML
> Get Started
> --Download
> --Hello World
> 
> I've already implemented logic in the template to auto-expand the
>> tree
>>> to
> the document for folks who have direct links.  So, if you do a Google
> Search and find the link to the MXML page, when you go to that page,
>>> the
> ToC will automatically look like:
> 
> Welcome
> --High Level View
> --Features
> AS3
> ---*MXML*
> Get Started
> 
> 
> 
> If you hit the main doc page, the ToC starts out collapsed so that
>> Get
> Started isn't pushed down by a bunch of Welcome sub-topics.  So the
>> ToC
> initially looks like:
> 
> Welcome
> Get Started
> 
> Now let's say you expand both Welcome and Get Started so you see:
> 
> Welcome
> --High Level View
> --Features
> Get Started
> --Download
> --Hello World
> 
> Then you click on Features.  The logic that opens trees to direct
>> links
 is
> going to cause the ToC to look like:
> 
> 
> Welcome
> --High Level View
> --Features
> Get Started
> 
> Even though you had expanded "Get Started" it will collapse when
>> going
>>> to
> the Features page.  That's because, without frames, each page is its
>>> own
> HTML page.  No state about 

Re: Royale Doc Table-of-Contents UX (was Re: Royale Documentation Page Layout Proposal)

[OmPrakash Muppirala]

I've been playing around with the tool: GitBook [www.gitbooks.io]
I was able to connect my personal fork of the royale-docs to my gitbooks.io
account.  This way, all my .md files are automatically available for Docs
creation.

Here is an example I created in a few minutes:
https://bigosmallm.gitbooks.io/royale-docs-test2/content/v/develop/Create%20An%20Application.html

The advantages I see using this tool are:

* Seems to be a widely used tool for documentation these days.  NPMjs.org,
React, Redux, etc. use Gitbook
* Two way sync between github and gitbook app.  That is, you can create an
.md file on github and see it on gitbook.  You can also create more content
using the WYSIWYG editor on Gitbook, which will be synced to the github
repo.
* Seems pretty straightforward to create a TOC.  It includes support for
tree structure by default
* We can choose to use the web app on gitbook.com or use the open
source(Apache V2 licensed | https://github.com/GitbookIO/gitbook) command
line tool.  The CLI will help us integrate with our Jenkins build for
example.
* Allows users to provide feedback on the site itself
* Allows us to point the docs site to our custom domain address


If there is more interest in trying this out, I can set up an Organization
account (free) and add users as needed.

Thanks,
Om

On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 2:53 AM, Andrew Wetmore  wrote:

> If the ToC accordions properly and we need three levels, I do not see why
> three levels would cause more confusion than two levels. If this is a
> resource providing information people are going to need to use Royale, and
> if that information is not readily available elsewhere, then we should make
> the ToC fit the information, not the other way around.
>
> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 5:56 AM, Carlos Rovira 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Alex,
> >
> > for TOC. One think that's very important to me: Please only *two levels*
> in
> > TOC. For simplicity and clarity. Like the demo page I did. It's the
> > standard right now and a three level only created confusion. Again see
> > Angular and React sites to match what they did and take it as a
> reference.
> >
> > For states. I think the trick here is that a .md page has some variables
> > that will make the right top level branch open in TOC and as well make
> the
> > right sub option appears as selected (strong type) and without link. As
> we
> > are dealing with static GitHub pages I think there's no concept of
> > component, only that all pages has the TOC added to the sidebar.
> >
> >
> >
> > 2018-01-27 1:18 GMT+01:00 Andrew Wetmore :
> >
> > > What you describe sounds fine to me. I don't think we need to worry
> about
> > > breadcrumbs and state and helping people go backwards through their
> > series
> > > of clicks.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 8:09 PM, Alex Harui 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Breaking out a separate thread on this...
> > > >
> > > > Thinking about this some more, I think I can generate an interactive
> > > > control with Jekyll, but I don't know how to make it retain state.  I
> > > > think that might require cookies and/or frames.
> > > >
> > > > For example, let's say the TOC looked like:
> > > >
> > > > Welcome
> > > > --High Level View
> > > > --Features
> > > > AS3
> > > > MXML
> > > > Get Started
> > > > --Download
> > > > --Hello World
> > > >
> > > > I've already implemented logic in the template to auto-expand the
> tree
> > to
> > > > the document for folks who have direct links.  So, if you do a Google
> > > > Search and find the link to the MXML page, when you go to that page,
> > the
> > > > ToC will automatically look like:
> > > >
> > > > Welcome
> > > > --High Level View
> > > > --Features
> > > > AS3
> > > > ---*MXML*
> > > > Get Started
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > If you hit the main doc page, the ToC starts out collapsed so that
> Get
> > > > Started isn't pushed down by a bunch of Welcome sub-topics.  So the
> ToC
> > > > initially looks like:
> > > >
> > > > Welcome
> > > > Get Started
> > > >
> > > > Now let's say you expand both Welcome and Get Started so you see:
> > > >
> > > > Welcome
> > > > --High Level View
> > > > --Features
> > > > Get Started
> > > > --Download
> > > > --Hello World
> > > >
> > > > Then you click on Features.  The logic that opens trees to direct
> links
> > > is
> > > > going to cause the ToC to look like:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Welcome
> > > > --High Level View
> > > > --Features
> > > > Get Started
> > > >
> > > > Even though you had expanded "Get Started" it will collapse when
> going
> > to
> > > > the Features page.  That's because, without frames, each page is its
> > own
> > > > HTML page.  No state about the ToC is retained or shared.
> > > >
> > > > If folks are ok with that, I can probably get that to work.
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts?
> > > > -Alex
> > > >
> > > --
> > > Andrew Wetmore
> > >
> > > http://cottage14.blogspot.com/
> 

Re: Royale Doc Table-of-Contents UX (was Re: Royale Documentation Page Layout Proposal)

[Andrew Wetmore]

If the ToC accordions properly and we need three levels, I do not see why
three levels would cause more confusion than two levels. If this is a
resource providing information people are going to need to use Royale, and
if that information is not readily available elsewhere, then we should make
the ToC fit the information, not the other way around.

On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 5:56 AM, Carlos Rovira 
wrote:

> Hi Alex,
>
> for TOC. One think that's very important to me: Please only *two levels* in
> TOC. For simplicity and clarity. Like the demo page I did. It's the
> standard right now and a three level only created confusion. Again see
> Angular and React sites to match what they did and take it as a reference.
>
> For states. I think the trick here is that a .md page has some variables
> that will make the right top level branch open in TOC and as well make the
> right sub option appears as selected (strong type) and without link. As we
> are dealing with static GitHub pages I think there's no concept of
> component, only that all pages has the TOC added to the sidebar.
>
>
>
> 2018-01-27 1:18 GMT+01:00 Andrew Wetmore :
>
> > What you describe sounds fine to me. I don't think we need to worry about
> > breadcrumbs and state and helping people go backwards through their
> series
> > of clicks.
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 8:09 PM, Alex Harui 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Breaking out a separate thread on this...
> > >
> > > Thinking about this some more, I think I can generate an interactive
> > > control with Jekyll, but I don't know how to make it retain state.  I
> > > think that might require cookies and/or frames.
> > >
> > > For example, let's say the TOC looked like:
> > >
> > > Welcome
> > > --High Level View
> > > --Features
> > > AS3
> > > MXML
> > > Get Started
> > > --Download
> > > --Hello World
> > >
> > > I've already implemented logic in the template to auto-expand the tree
> to
> > > the document for folks who have direct links.  So, if you do a Google
> > > Search and find the link to the MXML page, when you go to that page,
> the
> > > ToC will automatically look like:
> > >
> > > Welcome
> > > --High Level View
> > > --Features
> > > AS3
> > > ---*MXML*
> > > Get Started
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > If you hit the main doc page, the ToC starts out collapsed so that Get
> > > Started isn't pushed down by a bunch of Welcome sub-topics.  So the ToC
> > > initially looks like:
> > >
> > > Welcome
> > > Get Started
> > >
> > > Now let's say you expand both Welcome and Get Started so you see:
> > >
> > > Welcome
> > > --High Level View
> > > --Features
> > > Get Started
> > > --Download
> > > --Hello World
> > >
> > > Then you click on Features.  The logic that opens trees to direct links
> > is
> > > going to cause the ToC to look like:
> > >
> > >
> > > Welcome
> > > --High Level View
> > > --Features
> > > Get Started
> > >
> > > Even though you had expanded "Get Started" it will collapse when going
> to
> > > the Features page.  That's because, without frames, each page is its
> own
> > > HTML page.  No state about the ToC is retained or shared.
> > >
> > > If folks are ok with that, I can probably get that to work.
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> > > -Alex
> > >
> > --
> > Andrew Wetmore
> >
> > http://cottage14.blogspot.com/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  > source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
> > Virus-free.
> > www.avast.com
> >  > source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
> > <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> http://about.me/carlosrovira
>



-- 
Andrew Wetmore

http://cottage14.blogspot.com/

Re: Royale Documentation Page Layout Proposal

[Carlos Rovira]

Right, we should make this ourselves, but in the right way, using the right
path designed for this.
The wheel is already created so we should find how to make the wheel and
not trying to reinvent it.

In [1] seems to be the right steps to create a Jekyll theme from scratch. I
think we should follow this, and configure our _config.yml with the
published result.

Before changing more in the page doc example I did in WP, I think we should
follow this steps and try to make a theme with that and see the results.

Carlos



2018-01-28 8:02 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :

>
>
> On 1/27/18, 10:37 AM, "Gabe Harbs"  wrote:
>
> >Nice direction. I wonder if it makes sense to start with a Jekyll theme
> >such as the Jekyll-doc-theme[1] and build off of that.
>
> IMO, no.  I just don't want to spend time chasing down the IP of all of
> the bits of these themes.  They may say they are MIT, but who knows about
> some font or css they've borrowed from somewhere.  I think I've done a
> pretty good replication of the Royale Website header and footer.  If we
> can agree on what Carlos proposes or my suggested changes to it, I think I
> can have it ready in a couple of hours and then we can just produce
> content instead of providing more surface for IP nitpickers.  I keep
> hoping we will find a simple HTML implementation of what we want so we can
> replicate parts of it across all of our web pages, from royale.a.o to
> royale-docs to asdoc and the TryItNow app.  If we keep using different
> themes, we have to try to reproduce the commonality in each of those
> themes.
>
> >The theme I linked to has the advantage of offering simple blogging
> >capabilities as well.
>
> Jekyll was designed for blogs.  Again, I think I can take a proposal from
> Carlos and get it working in a couple of hours.
>
> Keep it simple.  Less process, more content.  We can get fancy later.
>
> My 2 cents,
> -Alex
>
>


-- 
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira

Re: Royale Doc Table-of-Contents UX (was Re: Royale Documentation Page Layout Proposal)

[Carlos Rovira]

Hi Alex,

for TOC. One think that's very important to me: Please only *two levels* in
TOC. For simplicity and clarity. Like the demo page I did. It's the
standard right now and a three level only created confusion. Again see
Angular and React sites to match what they did and take it as a reference.

For states. I think the trick here is that a .md page has some variables
that will make the right top level branch open in TOC and as well make the
right sub option appears as selected (strong type) and without link. As we
are dealing with static GitHub pages I think there's no concept of
component, only that all pages has the TOC added to the sidebar.



2018-01-27 1:18 GMT+01:00 Andrew Wetmore :

> What you describe sounds fine to me. I don't think we need to worry about
> breadcrumbs and state and helping people go backwards through their series
> of clicks.
>
> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 8:09 PM, Alex Harui 
> wrote:
>
> > Breaking out a separate thread on this...
> >
> > Thinking about this some more, I think I can generate an interactive
> > control with Jekyll, but I don't know how to make it retain state.  I
> > think that might require cookies and/or frames.
> >
> > For example, let's say the TOC looked like:
> >
> > Welcome
> > --High Level View
> > --Features
> > AS3
> > MXML
> > Get Started
> > --Download
> > --Hello World
> >
> > I've already implemented logic in the template to auto-expand the tree to
> > the document for folks who have direct links.  So, if you do a Google
> > Search and find the link to the MXML page, when you go to that page, the
> > ToC will automatically look like:
> >
> > Welcome
> > --High Level View
> > --Features
> > AS3
> > ---*MXML*
> > Get Started
> >
> >
> >
> > If you hit the main doc page, the ToC starts out collapsed so that Get
> > Started isn't pushed down by a bunch of Welcome sub-topics.  So the ToC
> > initially looks like:
> >
> > Welcome
> > Get Started
> >
> > Now let's say you expand both Welcome and Get Started so you see:
> >
> > Welcome
> > --High Level View
> > --Features
> > Get Started
> > --Download
> > --Hello World
> >
> > Then you click on Features.  The logic that opens trees to direct links
> is
> > going to cause the ToC to look like:
> >
> >
> > Welcome
> > --High Level View
> > --Features
> > Get Started
> >
> > Even though you had expanded "Get Started" it will collapse when going to
> > the Features page.  That's because, without frames, each page is its own
> > HTML page.  No state about the ToC is retained or shared.
> >
> > If folks are ok with that, I can probably get that to work.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> > -Alex
> >
> --
> Andrew Wetmore
>
> http://cottage14.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
>
>
>  source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
> Virus-free.
> www.avast.com
>  source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>



-- 
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira

Re: Royale Documentation Page Layout Proposal

[Alex Harui]

On 1/27/18, 10:37 AM, "Gabe Harbs"  wrote:

>Nice direction. I wonder if it makes sense to start with a Jekyll theme
>such as the Jekyll-doc-theme[1] and build off of that.

IMO, no.  I just don't want to spend time chasing down the IP of all of
the bits of these themes.  They may say they are MIT, but who knows about
some font or css they've borrowed from somewhere.  I think I've done a
pretty good replication of the Royale Website header and footer.  If we
can agree on what Carlos proposes or my suggested changes to it, I think I
can have it ready in a couple of hours and then we can just produce
content instead of providing more surface for IP nitpickers.  I keep
hoping we will find a simple HTML implementation of what we want so we can
replicate parts of it across all of our web pages, from royale.a.o to
royale-docs to asdoc and the TryItNow app.  If we keep using different
themes, we have to try to reproduce the commonality in each of those
themes.

>The theme I linked to has the advantage of offering simple blogging
>capabilities as well.

Jekyll was designed for blogs.  Again, I think I can take a proposal from
Carlos and get it working in a couple of hours.

Keep it simple.  Less process, more content.  We can get fancy later.

My 2 cents,
-Alex

Re: Royale Documentation Page Layout Proposal

[Gabe Harbs]

Nice direction. I wonder if it makes sense to start with a Jekyll theme such as 
the Jekyll-doc-theme[1] and build off of that.

The theme I linked to has the advantage of offering simple blogging 
capabilities as well.

[1]https://github.com/aksakalli/jekyll-doc-theme 


> On Jan 27, 2018, at 12:15 AM, Carlos Rovira  wrote:
> 
> Hi Alex,
> 
> 2018-01-26 21:40 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui  >:
> 
>> Yes, looks great!  My only thought is whether the red background should
>> just be a rectangle or may less height on the right so we can bring the
>> first line of text up higher and save more screen space.  IOW, try to fit
>> a few more lines of documentation on the screen.
>> 
>> 
> Right, I use the actual background, but as well though in create one for
> this. I'll give it a try.
> 
> 
>> Also, what if the title is really long and starts to overrun the right
>> side of the image?  I suppose we could try some fancy CSS bitmap operation.
>> 
> 
> I think that's not a problem, if the text is large it will continue in the
> next line, and should look ok.
> 
>> 
>> One other thing that might need its own thread:  I don't know of a Jekyll
>> way to get the ToC to be separately interactive where you can click on the
>> expand/collapse graphics and the ToC will act like a Tree control.  There
>> might be a way since I'm new to Jekyll.  We could replace the Jekyll
>> generation of the ToC with a Royale app that manages the ToC if we need it
>> to be interactive.  Right now everything is static.
>> 
> 
> I think this should me more easy since is widely used. We should
> investigate and hope to find and easy way to create a tree navigation.
> As well, I see github pages docs sites that in publication view gives a
> link to the GitHub .md file to edit it.
> So, in the end the docs should be as easy as so we can setup, edit and
> publish in a blink of an eye.
> We should find the right workflow and how to make a tree easily. Then
> creating and editing should be quick for any of us.
> 
> A last thing to take into account is about get the right CSS styles for
> code, and other things so .md will be stylized correctly.
> 
> I'll continue investigating
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Carlos
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> -Alex
>> 
>> On 1/26/18, 12:23 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:
>> 
>>> Cool!! :)
>>> 
>>> 2018-01-26 21:18 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira :
>>> 
 Hi,
 
 I'm playing with this concept
 
 
 https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> https%3A%2F%2Froyale.c
 odeoscopic.com%2Fdocumentation-page-example%
>> 2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40ad
 obe.com%7Cf3e8feca0c3e404e43e308d564fab63d%
>> 7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
 cee1%7C0%7C0%7C636525950328547739=vuv%
>> 2BuNsHKOO28vssWcdy2TvL1XdxpTS
 floN8ozx1rMk%3D=0
 
 Here I use:
 
 * The website page header
 * Royale logo white use
 * There's an alternate menu to configure (main website, blog,
 GitHub,...)
 * Search for docs (important)
 
 In content:
 
 * Main page doc title
 * Main doc section content (demo content to show something)
 
 Navigation:
 
 * Menu colapasable (accordion type)
 * Only 2 level
 * Menu content has some of the items I saw here and there, but is
 completly
 demo
 
 
 let me know what do you think
 
 Thanks
 
 --
 Carlos Rovira
 
 https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%
 2Fcarlosrovira=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> 7Cf3e8feca0c3e404e43e308
 d564fab63d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
>> 7C63652595032854773
 9=L0tB1P5SOatX1HpGHJ0F928hc2BNwbtg1OCeuXgo8gE%3D=0
 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> 
>>> Piotr Zarzycki
>>> 
>>> Patreon:
>>> *https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.patr
>>> eon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> 7Cf3e8feca0c3e40
>>> 4e43e308d564fab63d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
>> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365259503
>>> 28547739=X85j16C%2FKJ%2Ff%2FbMOl5O%2BfDDfT%
>> 2Biz9y5mSSBRdhplVKk%3D
>>> served=0
>>> > https%3A%2F%2Fwww.patr
>>> eon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> 7Cf3e8feca0c3e40
>>> 4e43e308d564fab63d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
>> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365259503
>>> 28547739=X85j16C%2FKJ%2Ff%2FbMOl5O%2BfDDfT%
>> 2Biz9y5mSSBRdhplVKk%3D
>>> served=0>*
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Carlos Rovira
> http://about.me/carlosrovira 

Royale Doc Table-of-Contents UX (was Re: Royale Documentation Page Layout Proposal)

[Alex Harui]

Breaking out a separate thread on this...

Thinking about this some more, I think I can generate an interactive
control with Jekyll, but I don't know how to make it retain state.  I
think that might require cookies and/or frames.

For example, let's say the TOC looked like:

Welcome
--High Level View
--Features
AS3
MXML
Get Started
--Download
--Hello World

I've already implemented logic in the template to auto-expand the tree to
the document for folks who have direct links.  So, if you do a Google
Search and find the link to the MXML page, when you go to that page, the
ToC will automatically look like:

Welcome
--High Level View
--Features
AS3
---*MXML*
Get Started



If you hit the main doc page, the ToC starts out collapsed so that Get
Started isn't pushed down by a bunch of Welcome sub-topics.  So the ToC
initially looks like:

Welcome
Get Started

Now let's say you expand both Welcome and Get Started so you see:

Welcome
--High Level View
--Features
Get Started
--Download
--Hello World

Then you click on Features.  The logic that opens trees to direct links is
going to cause the ToC to look like:


Welcome
--High Level View
--Features
Get Started

Even though you had expanded "Get Started" it will collapse when going to
the Features page.  That's because, without frames, each page is its own
HTML page.  No state about the ToC is retained or shared.

If folks are ok with that, I can probably get that to work.

Thoughts?
-Alex


On 1/26/18, 2:15 PM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira"
 wrote:

>Hi Alex,
>
>2018-01-26 21:40 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
>
>>One other thing that might need its own thread:  I don't know of a Jekyll
>> way to get the ToC to be separately interactive where you can click on
>>the
>> expand/collapse graphics and the ToC will act like a Tree control.
>>There
>> might be a way since I'm new to Jekyll.  We could replace the Jekyll
>> generation of the ToC with a Royale app that manages the ToC if we need
>>it
>> to be interactive.  Right now everything is static.
>>
>I think this should me more easy since is widely used. We should
>investigate and hope to find and easy way to create a tree navigation.
>As well, I see github pages docs sites that in publication view gives a
>link to the GitHub .md file to edit it.
>So, in the end the docs should be as easy as so we can setup, edit and
>publish in a blink of an eye.
>We should find the right workflow and how to make a tree easily. Then
>creating and editing should be quick for any of us.
>
>A last thing to take into account is about get the right CSS styles for
>code, and other things so .md will be stylized correctly.
>
>I'll continue investigating
>
>Thanks
>
>Carlos
>
>
>
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 1/26/18, 12:23 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki" 
>>wrote:
>>
>> >Cool!! :)
>> >
>> >2018-01-26 21:18 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira :
>> >
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> I'm playing with this concept
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> https%3A%2F%2Froyale.c
>> >>odeoscopic.com%2Fdocumentation-page-example%
>> 2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40ad
>> >>obe.com%7Cf3e8feca0c3e404e43e308d564fab63d%
>> 7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
>> >>cee1%7C0%7C0%7C636525950328547739=vuv%
>> 2BuNsHKOO28vssWcdy2TvL1XdxpTS
>> >>floN8ozx1rMk%3D=0
>> >>
>> >> Here I use:
>> >>
>> >> * The website page header
>> >> * Royale logo white use
>> >> * There's an alternate menu to configure (main website, blog,
>> >>GitHub,...)
>> >> * Search for docs (important)
>> >>
>> >> In content:
>> >>
>> >> * Main page doc title
>> >> * Main doc section content (demo content to show something)
>> >>
>> >> Navigation:
>> >>
>> >> * Menu colapasable (accordion type)
>> >> * Only 2 level
>> >> * Menu content has some of the items I saw here and there, but is
>> >>completly
>> >> demo
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> let me know what do you think
>> >>
>> >> Thanks
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Carlos Rovira
>> >>
>> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%
>> >>2Fcarlosrovira=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> 7Cf3e8feca0c3e404e43e308
>> >>d564fab63d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
>> 7C63652595032854773
>> >>9=L0tB1P5SOatX1HpGHJ0F928hc2BNwbtg1OCeuXgo8gE%3D=0
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >--
>> >
>> >Piotr Zarzycki
>> >
>> >Patreon:
>> >*https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.patr
>> >eon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> 7Cf3e8feca0c3e40
>> >4e43e308d564fab63d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
>> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365259503
>> >28547739=X85j16C%2FKJ%2Ff%2FbMOl5O%2BfDDfT%
>> 2Biz9y5mSSBRdhplVKk%3D
>> >served=0
>> >> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.patr
>> >eon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> 7Cf3e8feca0c3e40
>> >4e43e308d564fab63d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
>> 

Re: Royale Documentation Page Layout Proposal

[Carlos Rovira]

Hi Alex,

2018-01-26 21:40 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :

> Yes, looks great!  My only thought is whether the red background should
> just be a rectangle or may less height on the right so we can bring the
> first line of text up higher and save more screen space.  IOW, try to fit
> a few more lines of documentation on the screen.
>
>
Right, I use the actual background, but as well though in create one for
this. I'll give it a try.


> Also, what if the title is really long and starts to overrun the right
> side of the image?  I suppose we could try some fancy CSS bitmap operation.
>

I think that's not a problem, if the text is large it will continue in the
next line, and should look ok.

>
> One other thing that might need its own thread:  I don't know of a Jekyll
> way to get the ToC to be separately interactive where you can click on the
> expand/collapse graphics and the ToC will act like a Tree control.  There
> might be a way since I'm new to Jekyll.  We could replace the Jekyll
> generation of the ToC with a Royale app that manages the ToC if we need it
> to be interactive.  Right now everything is static.
>

I think this should me more easy since is widely used. We should
investigate and hope to find and easy way to create a tree navigation.
As well, I see github pages docs sites that in publication view gives a
link to the GitHub .md file to edit it.
So, in the end the docs should be as easy as so we can setup, edit and
publish in a blink of an eye.
We should find the right workflow and how to make a tree easily. Then
creating and editing should be quick for any of us.

A last thing to take into account is about get the right CSS styles for
code, and other things so .md will be stylized correctly.

I'll continue investigating

Thanks

Carlos




>
> Thanks,
> -Alex
>
> On 1/26/18, 12:23 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:
>
> >Cool!! :)
> >
> >2018-01-26 21:18 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira :
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I'm playing with this concept
> >>
> >>
> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Froyale.c
> >>odeoscopic.com%2Fdocumentation-page-example%
> 2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40ad
> >>obe.com%7Cf3e8feca0c3e404e43e308d564fab63d%
> 7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> >>cee1%7C0%7C0%7C636525950328547739=vuv%
> 2BuNsHKOO28vssWcdy2TvL1XdxpTS
> >>floN8ozx1rMk%3D=0
> >>
> >> Here I use:
> >>
> >> * The website page header
> >> * Royale logo white use
> >> * There's an alternate menu to configure (main website, blog,
> >>GitHub,...)
> >> * Search for docs (important)
> >>
> >> In content:
> >>
> >> * Main page doc title
> >> * Main doc section content (demo content to show something)
> >>
> >> Navigation:
> >>
> >> * Menu colapasable (accordion type)
> >> * Only 2 level
> >> * Menu content has some of the items I saw here and there, but is
> >>completly
> >> demo
> >>
> >>
> >> let me know what do you think
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> --
> >> Carlos Rovira
> >>
> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%
> >>2Fcarlosrovira=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7Cf3e8feca0c3e404e43e308
> >>d564fab63d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> 7C63652595032854773
> >>9=L0tB1P5SOatX1HpGHJ0F928hc2BNwbtg1OCeuXgo8gE%3D=0
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >
> >Piotr Zarzycki
> >
> >Patreon:
> >*https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.patr
> >eon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7Cf3e8feca0c3e40
> >4e43e308d564fab63d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365259503
> >28547739=X85j16C%2FKJ%2Ff%2FbMOl5O%2BfDDfT%
> 2Biz9y5mSSBRdhplVKk%3D
> >served=0
> > https%3A%2F%2Fwww.patr
> >eon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7Cf3e8feca0c3e40
> >4e43e308d564fab63d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365259503
> >28547739=X85j16C%2FKJ%2Ff%2FbMOl5O%2BfDDfT%
> 2Biz9y5mSSBRdhplVKk%3D
> >served=0>*
>
>


-- 
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira

Re: Royale Documentation Page Layout Proposal

[Alex Harui]

Yes, looks great!  My only thought is whether the red background should
just be a rectangle or may less height on the right so we can bring the
first line of text up higher and save more screen space.  IOW, try to fit
a few more lines of documentation on the screen.

Also, what if the title is really long and starts to overrun the right
side of the image?  I suppose we could try some fancy CSS bitmap operation.

One other thing that might need its own thread:  I don't know of a Jekyll
way to get the ToC to be separately interactive where you can click on the
expand/collapse graphics and the ToC will act like a Tree control.  There
might be a way since I'm new to Jekyll.  We could replace the Jekyll
generation of the ToC with a Royale app that manages the ToC if we need it
to be interactive.  Right now everything is static.

Thanks,
-Alex

On 1/26/18, 12:23 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:

>Cool!! :)
>
>2018-01-26 21:18 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira :
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm playing with this concept
>>
>> 
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Froyale.c
>>odeoscopic.com%2Fdocumentation-page-example%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40ad
>>obe.com%7Cf3e8feca0c3e404e43e308d564fab63d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
>>cee1%7C0%7C0%7C636525950328547739=vuv%2BuNsHKOO28vssWcdy2TvL1XdxpTS
>>floN8ozx1rMk%3D=0
>>
>> Here I use:
>>
>> * The website page header
>> * Royale logo white use
>> * There's an alternate menu to configure (main website, blog,
>>GitHub,...)
>> * Search for docs (important)
>>
>> In content:
>>
>> * Main page doc title
>> * Main doc section content (demo content to show something)
>>
>> Navigation:
>>
>> * Menu colapasable (accordion type)
>> * Only 2 level
>> * Menu content has some of the items I saw here and there, but is
>>completly
>> demo
>>
>>
>> let me know what do you think
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> --
>> Carlos Rovira
>> 
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%
>>2Fcarlosrovira=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cf3e8feca0c3e404e43e308
>>d564fab63d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C63652595032854773
>>9=L0tB1P5SOatX1HpGHJ0F928hc2BNwbtg1OCeuXgo8gE%3D=0
>>
>
>
>
>-- 
>
>Piotr Zarzycki
>
>Patreon: 
>*https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.patr
>eon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cf3e8feca0c3e40
>4e43e308d564fab63d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365259503
>28547739=X85j16C%2FKJ%2Ff%2FbMOl5O%2BfDDfT%2Biz9y5mSSBRdhplVKk%3D
>served=0
>eon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cf3e8feca0c3e40
>4e43e308d564fab63d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365259503
>28547739=X85j16C%2FKJ%2Ff%2FbMOl5O%2BfDDfT%2Biz9y5mSSBRdhplVKk%3D
>served=0>*

Re: Royale Documentation Page Layout Proposal

[Piotr Zarzycki]

Cool!! :)

2018-01-26 21:18 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira :

> Hi,
>
> I'm playing with this concept
>
> https://royale.codeoscopic.com/documentation-page-example/
>
> Here I use:
>
> * The website page header
> * Royale logo white use
> * There's an alternate menu to configure (main website, blog, GitHub,...)
> * Search for docs (important)
>
> In content:
>
> * Main page doc title
> * Main doc section content (demo content to show something)
>
> Navigation:
>
> * Menu colapasable (accordion type)
> * Only 2 level
> * Menu content has some of the items I saw here and there, but is completly
> demo
>
>
> let me know what do you think
>
> Thanks
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> http://about.me/carlosrovira
>



-- 

Piotr Zarzycki

Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki
*

Royale Documentation Page Layout Proposal

[Carlos Rovira]

Hi,

I'm playing with this concept

https://royale.codeoscopic.com/documentation-page-example/

Here I use:

* The website page header
* Royale logo white use
* There's an alternate menu to configure (main website, blog, GitHub,...)
* Search for docs (important)

In content:

* Main page doc title
* Main doc section content (demo content to show something)

Navigation:

* Menu colapasable (accordion type)
* Only 2 level
* Menu content has some of the items I saw here and there, but is completly
demo


let me know what do you think

Thanks

-- 
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira