2021-02-25 Meeting notes

 

Date

Feb 25, 2021

Participants

  • @Adam Butterworth (Deactivated)

  • @Adam Stankiewicz

  • @Ben Warzeski (Deactivated)

  • @Bronwyn Hawkins (Deactivated)

  • @David Joy (Deactivated)

  • @Eugene Kang

  • @Gabriel Weinberg

  • @Jeff Witt (Deactivated)

  • @Jon F

  • @Kevin Afable (Deactivated)

  • @Kevin McGrath (Deactivated)

  • @TJ Tracy (Deactivated)

Goals

  • Follow up: Alignment on proposal for fullscreen modal, take any final important input

  • Socialize marketing modules

    • Determine if they have a home in Paragon

  • Socialize static code analysis of Paragon usage in dependents.

Discussion topics

Time

Item

Presenter

Notes

Time

Item

Presenter

Notes

10 min

Fullscreen modal

@Gabriel Weinberg

BW: having the footer bar be an overlay/on white even if it doesn’t scroll looks good/ is not unexpected.

JW: Scrolling in modals feel like they’re unfriendly. content should fit entirely in its modal. GW: I could state that best practice is to only put one screen’s worth of content in here. JW: has no objections. will look into css clamp functionality.

KM: When would we use full screen modal vs. a new page or tab?

DJ: I think the choice of whether or not to use a full screen modal should be described in its usage guidelines, but how to break up content across multiple sub-screens feels unrelated

10 min

Marketing modules for PLA

@Bronwyn Hawkins (Deactivated)

Share work and discuss: should these live in Paragon?

JW: Is this contentful modules as in prospectus today? AB: Yes

BW: how much is this reusable modules in marketing and how much in paragon?

BW: These feel different from most of our UIs outside marketing. And would look out of place.

JW: Are there legal implications. There’s a step toward trademark infringement if we put this in Paragon and others use it. Putting any of this in paragon would generate confusion.

DJ: There’s significant part of this that’s highly branded. It would be weird in Paragon

TJ: because these are tied to contentful and gatsby as is. if we build the components a different way then it will be different. It would add a dependency in Paragon on contentful and gatsby. DJ: We agree that’s a non-starter. Is it possible for prospectus to have wrappers splitting data and display. TJ: Yes you could. if it’s something we want to do. but it is a departure from prospectus at the moment.

KM: I would propose designers is that we branch this out into it’s own library. It could be managed and maintained separately from our own library. That marketing component library could depend on paragon 2021. BW: would that library be explicitly paragon-internal or something? KM: I would imagine a contentful or marketing focused library to leverage. Rather than trying to have fully duplicate libraries.

Didn’t get to this → next time.

Low priority

Dependent usage analysis PR

@Adam Butterworth (Deactivated)

 

Action items

@Gabriel Weinberg address team input on the fullscreen modal. Notes captured above.
@Ben Warzeski (Deactivated) double check the mobile guidelines from @Bronwyn Hawkins (Deactivated) on the sheet component

Decisions