Question on "complexity" column in `index.md`
Nobody has claimed this yet.
Assessment
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Newbie friendliness
- 30/100
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Activity status
- Stale
- Tech stack
- jekyll, markdown
- Domain
- documentation
Research direction
Start with index.md and read the Look and feel section and its current table. Review the four frameworks and the existing Complexity, Client, and Example columns, then determine how Complexity is defined before deciding whether the proposed table changes are appropriate. Done means the table structure and the treatment of Complexity are agreed and documented.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Description
As we discussed on Teams, I'm working on a PR from my fork of this repo to add some of the new information learned from the April 2024 mapping demo day. Since the last major update to index.md, we have a lot more examples of tools across government which I think would be helpful to add to the Look and feel section of this page.
One of the things I'd like to do is simplify the table (see screenshot below) to:
- add a column that makes it more clear to the reader which of the four frameworks listed in the above section applies to each tool (e.g. SaaS, Gov-hosted, DIY, or Custom)
- Combine
ClientandExamplecolumn into one, where we have a list of the client or tool name that is hyperlinked instead of writing out the URL. This would make it easier to list multiple tools for the same framework
One question is the Complexity column. Does "complexity" apply to the framework or specific tool (looks like the latter but want to be sure). Also, how is it determined? Is it still necessary to have? The table might be neater if we dropped this column. Would love to hear thoughts.
- Dominant language
- SCSS
- Stars
- 11
- Forks
- 6
- Avg merge
- 17h 6m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 1
Getting set up
- No Dockerfile or Docker Compose file
- Has a pull request template
- Read the contributing guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
More from bcgov/bcwebmaps-options
-
Difficulty 4/5 3-5 days Newbie friendliness 20/100
bcgov/bcwebmaps-options#46 ·
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 35/100
bcgov/bcwebmaps-options#22 ·
-
Difficulty 5/5 Over a week Newbie friendliness 20/100
bcgov/bcwebmaps-options#9 · 1 comment ·
-
Difficulty 5/5 Over a week Newbie friendliness 10/100
bcgov/bcwebmaps-options#8 · 1 comment ·
All issues in bcgov/bcwebmaps-options
Similar issues
-
docs(storage-resize-images): kit README's Multiple instances section fails in an installed projectOpenkits type: bug
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 77/100
firebase/extensions#3271 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
https://docs.Open
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 72/100
-
Lists nested four or more levels deep have no left marginPossibly taken @tpavlic claimed this today. Open
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 83/100
josephwright/ltx-talk#292 ·
-
Say how an agent should weigh annotations that the page wrote about itselfPossibly taken A pull request linked to this issue is open or already merged. Open
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 72/100
webmachinelearning/webmcp#353 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 67/100
linebender/resvg#1179 · 1 comment ·
Maintainers usually reply within 2 days