-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Consolidate 3 demo pages — there should be only one #2158
Comments
If y'all agree, then which site path should be canonical? |
I'd avoid adding it to the top level. Have you considered the possibility of adding a link to the homepage, say, next to "Learn more"? |
The repo demo title says that it's a "community" app, so the canonical link should be under community. I suggest dropping the top-level entry, and consider adding a link to the home page instead. My 2 cents. |
For now I think the community page could be considered canonical, but it's not just a community app - it's a canonical reference implementation of opentelemetry. I think that elevates its importance tremendously, especially for an architect or someone in an IC leadership position at an organization who's tasked with understanding how OTel can fit into their systems more broadly. I would want to at least keep a menu entry under Getting Started for that purpose alone. Top-level is probably also fine I suppose, is there additional concern with having multiple menu entries? |
Ok
Ok, that's important to know, and should be added to the page description and/or title.
Agreed.
Ok.
I'd avoid adding it to the Docs top level. Instead, I'd propose adding a link to the demo to either:
I'd vote for the former. Thoughts?
No. |
FYI, I'm going to address the changes to this issue incrementally. First, I'll eliminate the page duplication, then I can address adding mention of the demo being a "reference implementation", etc. |
Closed by #2257 |
The fact that we have 3 demo pages with the same opening text is a bad smell, not great for SEO, potentially confusing for readers.
For context:
IMHO, it would be preferable to:
Thoughts @svrnm @cartermp?
Update title and/or description to state that the demo is a "reference implementation"The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: