Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

WG Update #470

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: develop
Choose a base branch
from
Open

WG Update #470

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

CharlotteTill
Copy link
Contributor

feat: new WG pages
update: agenda docs & member logo
fix: updates for consistency
addresses issue #391

CharlotteTill and others added 2 commits October 9, 2024 16:41
@CharlotteTill
Redesigned website to enable dedicated WG pages with standardized lay…
84dfc58 
…outs and content. Also conducted general updates; including agenda documents, member logo, streamlining WG information, and associated updates

Redesigned website to enable dedicated WG pages with standardized layouts and content. Also conducted general updates; including agenda documents, member logo, streamlining  WG information, and associated updates
@alee
fix(content): minor language refinement
0e8e2c4 
remove redundant text that describe working groups and co-chairs and
self organization etc.

trialing italics instead of bold for subsections, feedback welcome
alee
alee reviewed Oct 16, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@alee alee left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks Charlotte, this is a good start. A few issues:

Please remember to follow the conventional commits guidelines.

https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/#summary

I'll amend your original commit before merging but it's a good habit to try and follow yourself.

Should we keep the "Friends of the ... Working Group" sections? It looks a little odd at the moment and doesn't have any content, we can always add it back in when there is content instead of having empty placeholders. Same goes for the Current Developments / Previous Projects sections which should be filled in or left out.

I tightened up the language on the working groups main page to remove some unnecessary redundancy, let me know what you think.

@cmbarton

@CharlotteTill
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thank you Allen. I think the changes to the main page regarding WG language work well. I approve.
As for the sections within the individual WG sections - the section headers were suggested by members of the Certification group, and no feedback (positive or negative) was received by any other WG. For now, I agree that the 'Friends of the ... Working Group' header can likely be removed, at least for now. The current and previous projects headers seem very needed. Maybe I should add text under each to the effect of 'coming soon' thus allowing the main changes to go live, while each WG complies what they would like added to each section, the that content can be a future update - either by me, or by the individual WG rep who has taken on the role up page updates?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@alee alee alee left review comments

At least 1 approving review is required to merge this pull request.

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@CharlotteTill @alee