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

Update attention boxes for 0.4 pages #529

Closed
kathryn-ods opened this issue Jan 22, 2024 · 11 comments
Closed

Update attention boxes for 0.4 pages #529

kathryn-ods opened this issue Jan 22, 2024 · 11 comments

Comments

@kathryn-ods
Copy link
Contributor

kathryn-ods commented Jan 22, 2024

Several pages include an attention/warning box at the top of the page. This will need updating

'Attention

This is v0.3 of the Beneficial Ownership Data Standard. It includes updates to the data model and codelists as well as additional technical guidance.

Implementers should be aware that future changes are anticipated, before a version 1.0 release. See the Changelog and About pages for more information.

MUST and SHOULD are used in the schema to denote required and recommended elements of the Standard, as defined in RFC2119.'

@StephenAbbott
Copy link
Member

@kathryn-ods Should we capture here or on a separate bug ticket that the attention boxes don't appear for any version 0.2 pages? https://standard.openownership.org/en/0.2.0/

@kathryn-ods
Copy link
Contributor Author

@StephenAbbott I am seeing them on 0.2 pages - wonder why you're not getting them.

I am seeing the warnings on
https://standard.openownership.org/en/0.2.0/schema/concepts.html
https://standard.openownership.org/en/0.2.0/schema/schema-browser.html
https://standard.openownership.org/en/0.2.0/schema/reference.html

'Attention

This is v0.2 of the Beneficial Ownership Data Standard. It includes updates to the data model and additional codelist information. Implementers should be aware that future changes are anticipated, before a version 1.0 release. See the Changelog and About pages for more information.

MUST and SHOULD are used in the schema to denote required and recommended elements of the Standard, as defined in RFC2119.'

@StephenAbbott
Copy link
Member

@kathryn-ods Do you see warnings on Homepage / Primer / Example data / About section pages?

https://standard.openownership.org/en/0.2.0/index.html
https://standard.openownership.org/en/0.2.0/primer/index.html
https://standard.openownership.org/en/0.2.0/examples/index.html
https://standard.openownership.org/en/0.2.0/about/index.html

I can also see the warnings on the pages in Data Schema section - but not in other sections or on the homepage.

@kathryn-ods
Copy link
Contributor Author

@StephenAbbott looking at the source files the only pages that include the warning are below, this is the same for the 0.2 and 0.3 docs. I don't think we necessarily need a warning on pages that aren't specifically detailing the schema. We could add it on to other pages if needed though.

  • concepts
  • index (data schema)
  • reference
  • schema-browser
  • index (technical guidance)

Currently the warning is being manually added to each page - when we get round to updating these we should also consider whether the warning could be referenced from one source to minimise the need to update each warning individually.

@kathryn-ods
Copy link
Contributor Author

see #544 which saves the warning box in one file and references out to it

@kathryn-ods kathryn-ods moved this from 🔖 Ready to 🏗 In progress in Release tracker: BODS version 0.4 Feb 5, 2024
@kd-ods
Copy link
Collaborator

kd-ods commented Feb 16, 2024

Can we call this ticket done @kathryn-ods @StephenAbbott? If we want to add the attention box to other pages in the docs it's now super-easy thanks to Kathryn's refactoring work.

@kathryn-ods
Copy link
Contributor Author

@kd-ods yes this can close if we are happy with the current text - I think we should remove the final sentence as it isn't really a warning.

" This is v0.4 of the Beneficial Ownership Data Standard. It includes updates to the data model and codelists as well as additional technical guidance.

Implementers should be aware that future changes are anticipated, before a version 1.0 release. See the Changelog and About pages for more information.

MUST and SHOULD are used in the schema to denote required and recommended elements of the Standard, as defined in RFC2119."

@StephenAbbott
Copy link
Member

@kathryn-ods @kd-ods Checking here: do we have two separate warning messages? Was checking #544 but can't tell.

The text above suggested by Kathryn is good as a warning for viewers of version 0.4 pages appearing at the top of - for example - the schema browser page as it does for v0.3 https://standard.openownership.org/en/0.3.0/schema/schema-browser.html (happy with suggestion to remove final sentence, @kathryn-ods).

But we'll also need a different warning message for older versions of BODS to say something like "You are not reading the most recent version of this documentation. 0.3.0 is the latest version available" as we currently do on pages like this.

I can only seem to see one file - warningbox.rst - in #544. Am I getting that right?

@kathryn-ods kathryn-ods changed the title Update attention boxes Update attention boxes for 0.4 pages Feb 22, 2024
@kathryn-ods
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yes the previous versions have their own warning messages in their respective repos.

I haven't made the change to make it quicker to edit in those repos (might be worth doing if they're likely to keep changing)

I've made #560 to organise those changes.

@StephenAbbott
Copy link
Member

Ah. Thank you. Got it

@kathryn-ods kathryn-ods moved this from 🏗 In progress to 👀 In review in Release tracker: BODS version 0.4 Feb 22, 2024
@kathryn-ods
Copy link
Contributor Author

Small change to the wording of the warning for 0.4 in #561

@kathryn-ods kathryn-ods moved this from 👀 In review to ✅ Done in Release tracker: BODS version 0.4 Feb 23, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
No open projects
Status: Done
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants