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

(DOCSP-39526): Consolidate Authenticate Users page #3281

Merged
merged 16 commits into from
Jun 18, 2024

Conversation

dacharyc
Copy link
Collaborator

@dacharyc dacharyc commented May 31, 2024

Pull Request Info - SDK Docs Consolidation

Jira ticket: https://jira.mongodb.org/browse/DOCSP-39526

Staged Page

  • Authenticate Users
  • Manage User Tokens: New page that moves the user access token info off the "Authenticate" page. This is currently a separate page in Flutter. As devs shouldn't have to handle this manually for most use cases, and the OTP is getting super long, I thought it made sense to move the info off to a separate page.

Page Source

Add links to every SDK's pages where you got the SDK-specific information:

PR Author Checklist

Before requesting a review for your PR, please check these items:

  • Open the PR against the feature-consolidated-sdk-docs branch instead of master
  • Tag the consolidated page for:
    • genre
    • meta.keywords
    • meta.description

Naming

Links and Refs

  • Create new consolidated SDK ref targets starting with "_sdks-" for relevant sections
  • Remove or update any SDK-specific refs to use the new consolidated SDK ref targets
  • Update any Kotlin API links to use the new Kotlin SDK roles

Content

  • Shared code boxes have snippets or placeholders for all 9 languages
  • API description sections have API details or a generic placeholder for all 9 languages
  • Check related pages for relevant content to include
  • Create a ticket for missing examples in each relevant SDK: Consolidation Gaps epic

Reviewer Checklist

As a reviewer, please check these items:

  • Shared code example boxes contain language-specific snippets or placeholders for every language
  • API reference details contain working API reference links or generic content
  • Realm naming/language has been updated
  • All relevant content from individual SDK pages is present on the consolidated page

@dacharyc dacharyc added the merge to feature branch Unreleased feature - do not merge to Master label May 31, 2024
Copy link

github-actions bot commented May 31, 2024

Readability for Commit Hash: 47ab62b

You can see any previous Readability scores (if they exist) by looking
at the comment's history.

Readability scores for changed documents:

  • source/sdk/users: Grade Level: 30.9, Reading Ease: -70.49
  • source/sdk/users/authenticate-users: Grade Level: 9.8, Reading Ease: 49.11
  • source/sdk/users/manage-user-tokens: Grade Level: 9.6, Reading Ease: 49.72

For Grade Level, aim for 8 or below.

For Reading Ease scores, aim for 60 or above:

Score Difficulty
90-100 Very Easy
80-89 Easy
70-79 Fairly Easy
60-69 Medium
50-59 Fairly Hard
30-49 Hard
0-29 Very Hard

For help improving readability, try Hemingway App.

@dacharyc dacharyc marked this pull request as ready for review June 4, 2024 16:15
Copy link
Collaborator

@krollins-mdb krollins-mdb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I left a handful of relatively minor comments and suggestions. Otherwise, LGTM!

source/sdk/users/authenticate-users.txt Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Comment on lines 71 to 72
#. :ref:`Enable and Configure Authentication Providers
<authentication-providers>` in the App Services documentation
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The framing here makes "in the App Services documentation" read weird. It feels like we're asking readers to enable and configure providers in the documentation itself, rather than asking them to complete the procedure. We know there's a procedure in the App Services docs, but readers won't necessarily know that.

We can adjust the framing in lines 67 and 68 to make it clear we're talking about reading and completing steps in other parts of the docs, or figure out a way to make lines 71 and 72 less ambiguous. I know we generally try to warn readers when we pass them off to another docs site, but the easy answer is to remove "in the App Services documentation". 😆

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ahh, gotcha. Hah, I know Cory feels pretty strongly about keeping the "in the App Services documentation" so I'll wordsmith ;)

source/sdk/users/authenticate-users.txt Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

.. include:: /includes/sdk-examples/users/authenticate-log-in-user.rst

.. This tab group is only used to populate some additional details for Swift
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This seems pretty awkward. I know it breaks the pattern a bit, but could we move the non-async example into the non-async description include? So, put .. include:: /includes/sdk-examples/users/authenticate-log-in-user.rst in /includes/api-details/swift/users/authenticate-log-in-user-description.rst.

Then we could also include the async description content in the regular description include and use the async example.

...this stuff is difficult to write about. lol. Happy to talk more if that thought isn't clear.

source/sdk/users/authenticate-users.txt Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
source/sdk/users/authenticate-users.txt Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@dacharyc dacharyc merged commit 7cf0f51 into mongodb:feature-consolidated-sdk-docs Jun 18, 2024
5 checks passed
@dacharyc dacharyc deleted the DOCSP-39526 branch June 18, 2024 19:58
@docs-builder-bot
Copy link

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
merge to feature branch Unreleased feature - do not merge to Master
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants