Closed jrmlhermitte closed 6 years ago
First someone would have to write some event-model docs.... This link is a 404.
Right. This link: https://github.com/NSLS-II/event-model
im fine with either, i think docs would make more sense?
we can push this for now, but i suggest we write some nice docs for the event model, or the schemas in general. what do you think?
Agree
On Sun, Jul 15, 2018, 6:19 PM Julien Lhermitte notifications@github.com wrote:
we can push this for now, but i suggest we write some nice docs for the event model, or the schemas in general. what do you think?
— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/NSLS-II/docs/pull/85#issuecomment-405125836, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACLKMEozLCr3fJ54jQlPf8JM_92lTYP1ks5uG83_gaJpZM4VQXio .
The Documents page in the bluesky docs covers the same material and is able to provide some context for why/how these layouts are used. It would be sensible to give event-model standalone documentation as well, but I would make it a low priority relative to other concerns.
Looks good to me as a placeholder. We can update the link once the docs are available.
I disagree. If someone clicks that link, they might get the wrong impression that all the documentation links are just GitHub repo pages. Let's only link things that meet a certain standard of quality.
My original suggestion in the issue that prompted this PR was to add a link to the Documents page in the bluesky docs. I still think that's the way to go because if you want to understand the Event Model you would start there and then look for a link to learn more (i.e. read the technical schemas).
OK, I reverted the merge via #86.
From issue here