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.

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

[DOCS-1209][DOCS-1204] Document full-screen panel view, various panel sharing options, customizing number of panels per section #1087

Open
wants to merge 13 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

mdlinville
Copy link
Contributor

@mdlinville mdlinville commented Feb 6, 2025

@mdlinville mdlinville requested a review from a team as a code owner February 6, 2025 19:46
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Feb 6, 2025

Images automagically compressed by Calibre's image-actions

Compression reduced images by 35.5%, saving 3.61 KB.

Filename Before After Improvement Visual comparison
assets/images/app_ui/panel_fullscreen.png 10.17 KB 6.56 KB -35.5% View diff

439 images did not require optimisation.

Copy link

cloudflare-workers-and-pages bot commented Feb 6, 2025

Deploying docs with  Cloudflare Pages  Cloudflare Pages

Latest commit: 1642fbc
Status: ✅  Deploy successful!
Preview URL: https://6e818f5b.docodile.pages.dev
Branch Preview URL: https://docs-1209.docodile.pages.dev

View logs

@mdlinville mdlinville changed the title [DOCS-1209] Document full-screen panel view and various panel sharing options [DOCS-1209][DOCS-1204] Document full-screen panel view, various panel sharing options, customizing number of panels per section Feb 6, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Feb 6, 2025

Images automagically compressed by Calibre's image-actions

Compression reduced images by 35.5%, saving 3.61 KB.

Filename Before After Improvement Visual comparison
assets/images/app_ui/panel_fullscreen.png 10.17 KB 6.56 KB -35.5% View diff

439 images did not require optimisation.

Copy link

@connieelee connieelee left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm with minor suggestion. not sure if you need product/vis approval too?

content/guides/models/app/features/panels/_index.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@mdlinville
Copy link
Contributor Author

lgtm with minor suggestion. not sure if you need product/vis approval too?

Who would you suggest or where should I ask for a reviewer?

@connieelee
Copy link

lgtm with minor suggestion. not sure if you need product/vis approval too?

Who would you suggest or where should I ask for a reviewer?

I'm not really sure what the expected process is for docs changes either. Is an engineer the right person to approve? Does a product manager need to sign off too (in this case that would be Tristan)? Or the eng manager? @ktmathews89 I'd love to chat about this, maybe at the next team sync

@ktmathews89
Copy link

lgtm with minor suggestion. not sure if you need product/vis approval too?

Who would you suggest or where should I ask for a reviewer?

I'm not really sure what the expected process is for docs changes either. Is an engineer the right person to approve? Does a product manager need to sign off too (in this case that would be Tristan)? Or the eng manager? @ktmathews89 I'd love to chat about this, maybe at the next team sync

Great question... I will add this topic to our retro doc. After we decide we can let docs team know in the DOCs ticket who should be approving.

@mdlinville
Copy link
Contributor Author

lgtm with minor suggestion. not sure if you need product/vis approval too?

Who would you suggest or where should I ask for a reviewer?

I'm not really sure what the expected process is for docs changes either. Is an engineer the right person to approve? Does a product manager need to sign off too (in this case that would be Tristan)? Or the eng manager? @ktmathews89 I'd love to chat about this, maybe at the next team sync

Great question... I will add this topic to our retro doc. After we decide we can let docs team know in the DOCs ticket who should be approving.

Let's move internal process discussions elsewhere. :) I'll start a thread.


If multiple panels have the same name, this is the URL for the first panel with the name. In this case, find the URL by [viewing the panel in full-screen mode]({{< relref "#view-and-share-a-panel-in-full-screen-mode" >}}).

### Share a panel with a direct link that anyone can access
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I feel like this and the following section are basically the same thing, the difference is whether it's a public link or not. Maybe they could be consolidated?

1. Click **Share panel in report**.
1. In the **Share** tab, change **Only those who are invited have access** to **Anyone with the link cah view**, then choose **Share on Twitter**, **Share on Reddit**, **Share on LinkedIn**, or **Copy embed link**.

### Determine a panel's full-screen URL programmatically
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think is hanging...you covered in a subsection above I think.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Maybe I'm misunderstanding. I think it is useful information we should documented, I just thought it was documented in the section "Compose a panel's full-screen URL programmatically" above.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah I think I finally understood, and have tried to address this in the latest commit.

- Remove stray H3
- Combine the share-by-email and share-by-direct-link sections
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants