Skip to content

Conversation

@oliviertassinari
Copy link
Member

@oliviertassinari oliviertassinari commented Nov 13, 2020

These changes help make the point that the sx prop allows a denser vertical spacing. They don't introduce a scrollbar in the docs. They would if I had use 100 or more.


#23294 was slightly rushed. I'm aware of 3 other follow-up changes that are coming:

  • @mbrookes that was planning to revamp the wordings
  • @mnajdova that was planning to act on the feedback to improve the description of /system/properties/
  • The need to remove the orphan demos.

@oliviertassinari oliviertassinari added the docs Improvements or additions to the documentation. label Nov 13, 2020
@mui-pr-bot
Copy link

mui-pr-bot commented Nov 13, 2020

Details of bundle changes

Generated by 🚫 dangerJS against e7ad1bc

@oliviertassinari oliviertassinari force-pushed the docs-system-improve-vertical-spacing branch from 11ca1bb to e7ad1bc Compare November 13, 2020 23:27
@oliviertassinari oliviertassinari requested review from eps1lon and mnajdova and removed request for eps1lon November 13, 2020 23:43
Copy link
Member

@mnajdova mnajdova left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks much better 👍

@oliviertassinari oliviertassinari merged commit 048ea98 into mui:next Nov 14, 2020
@oliviertassinari oliviertassinari deleted the docs-system-improve-vertical-spacing branch November 14, 2020 09:45
Copy link
Member

@eps1lon eps1lon left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

#23294 was slightly rushed.

Moving fast requires actions not words. The follow-up was announced so I have no idea what the problem is now. We're not deploying on merge anyway.

Funnily enough a 17 day open PR is considered "rushed" but your 11 hour open on is not. The "consistency" you always strive for should be applied to your own work first before demanding it of other collaborators.

The character width is not just chosen because we felt funny but because it's tied to the documentation styles. Any change should be applied to all pages. Formatting only lives from consistency.

@oliviertassinari
Copy link
Member Author

oliviertassinari commented Nov 14, 2020

Moving fast requires actions not words. The follow-up was announced so I have no idea what the problem is now. We're not deploying on merge anyway.

Yeah, we had to unlock it at some point, we can't make each pull-request perfect, never going to happen nor should we aim for it, it's about the good enough. I was more interested in listing the follow-ups that can help.


The character width is not just chosen because we felt funny but because it's tied to the documentation styles. Any change should be applied to all pages. Formatting only lives from consistency.

There are two different use-cases:

  1. See a completing demo that wants to make me use the module. A developer wants it to go to the point, see the potential.
  2. Read the docs, the API for a module I need to use. A developer doesn't want to scroll to find important information.

I think that it's completely fine to have two different formating configurations for 1. and 2., the user-journey and expectations are different. It's always about how easy a developer can process the information and how can the formatting help.

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

Labels

docs Improvements or additions to the documentation.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants