Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jan 8, 2025. It is now read-only.

Create article scope #85

Closed
klizhentas opened this issue Jul 3, 2022 · 7 comments · Fixed by #94
Closed

Create article scope #85

klizhentas opened this issue Jul 3, 2022 · 7 comments · Fixed by #94
Assignees

Comments

@klizhentas
Copy link

Problem

We have tried multiple approaches to fix tailor navigation structure, including changing navigation in different scopes. This has proved to be confusing, because people have to constantly switch back and forth between scopes just to see the article.

Hiding navigation items or changing structure is bad for search indexing and discovery.

Instead we should keep the navigation structure static, but have a very explicit label in the top header area that highlights the n, please create a scopes part in the header that works like Gitlab:

---
title: Application Access Role-Based Access Control
description: Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) for Teleport Application Access.
scopes: oss, enterprise, cloud
---

Screen Shot 2022-07-03 at 4 24 44 PM

Here is how title should look like approximately:

Screen Shot 2022-07-03 at 4 27 33 PM

Supported scope and description:

scope: oss, enterprise
The title should render on-hover "Available in OSS and Enterprise editions"

Special case is all, renders as: ALL

scope: all
The title should render on-hover "Available in OSS, Enterprise, Cloud editions"
@ptgott
Copy link
Contributor

ptgott commented Jul 5, 2022

I think this would be great, and have some thoughts:

  1. I think we should also indicate in the navigation sidebar that a page only applies to a particular edition. This way, a user won't need to navigate to a page to realize that it doesn't apply to their use-case. One way we could do this is below (just to illustrate what I mean). This will reduce the space we have in the nav bar for text, so we can think of alternatives as well.

Screen Shot 2022-07-05 at 10 10 25 AM

  1. The banner indicating which edition a page supports should be as clear as possible, since some users may be arriving at the docs site without knowing that we have three editions. The majority of users already ignore the scope dropdown menu, so we should minimize the risk that users ignore this banner as well.

@klizhentas
Copy link
Author

@ptgott we can try this, but because there are a lot of nav sections like that, we should make it more subtle, a small gray label will be better.

@ulysseskan
Copy link

ulysseskan commented Jul 5, 2022

Banner blindness may be keeping people from looking at our header and missing the edition selector on top.

To increase visibility, how about listing all sections for all editions neatly in the left navbar (perhaps also increasing contrast and making the sidebar wider), but adding bold text "This feature is only available in the Enterprise edition." as a one-line 2nd paragraph of the article near the top of the page - in the same font as the article.

@klizhentas
Copy link
Author

Screen Shot 2022-07-05 at 11 06 22 AM

@ulysseskan good point. I think we can try a simple solution to this problem by making a header to be a more regular header. @Alqanar can you try the style above to see if it works better.

@Alqanar
Copy link
Contributor

Alqanar commented Jul 6, 2022

@klizhentas I would like to clarify.

  1. What we do with header?
  • header with the grey gradient:

gradient_header

  • header with the white background:

white_header

  • header with extra line, where we specify scope

header_with_extra_line

  • initial version from the issue, but with white background
  1. Do we make any changes to the navigation? Something like that?

Screenshot 2022-07-06 at 17 39 04

@klizhentas
Copy link
Author

@Alqanar header with white background with extra line, where we specify scope looks great, let's try this one

@klizhentas
Copy link
Author

@Alqanar re: icons, let's try those, but move the icons in front of the text

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants