corwintines
commented
1 year ago This is a great idea! Will bring this up with the team to get a bit more input, but this is a direction I think makes sense to go with for tagging tutorials.
Closed 0xKai27 closed 3 months ago
corwintines
commented
1 year ago This is a great idea! Will bring this up with the team to get a bit more input, but this is a direction I think makes sense to go with for tagging tutorials.
wackerow
commented
1 year ago Thanks for posting @0xKai27! Appreciate the well thought out proposal.
Overall I really like what you've laid out. I do think the current tags are far too messy, and we need a way to trim these down.
I would be really curious to see how our current tutorials would look if these tags were to be applied. As the tutorials stand, they live specifically as "developer tutorials". As such, I do wonder if being a little more granular with some of these could be beneficial, such as expanding out "Dev Tools", or "Client Libraries"
I also suspect a handful of these, such as Metaverse, Gaming, Hardware, would probably be fairly low usage.
Curious what others think, but I think with a few small adjustments this would likely be a nice upgrade for user experience.
0xKai27
commented
1 year ago Definitely agree with your sentiment on the granularity of the "developer tutorials" related tags. I think the tricky part here is the level of assumed knowledge that a reader will have with regards to the Ethereum stack.
In the optimistic scenario (i.e. they've read through the ethereum.org getting started, etc.), breaking down the toolings based on the below would definitely have more value add:
Will likely also have to arrive a decision while taking into account how the "User Guides" (#8757) will relate to these tutorials. For example, if "Developer Tutorials" and "User Guides" flow is separate, we can maintain a more narrow set of tags specific to developer content. Additionally, this will also reduce the confusion for non-developer personas.
corwintines
commented
1 year ago I agree with this, removing project-specific tags for something more general is a great idea. I think a start we can have for this could be:
If there are any others you think would be fitting @0xKai27, then I think we can test them out and see on review. I do think there are going to be some tags suggested here which won't have a place at the moment as @wackerow mentioned, but leaving what I think will be high impact for now.
What do you suggest for next steps? Would you like to work on going through the tutorials and updating these tags?
0xKai27
commented
1 year ago Yeah, I can run through the tutorials and categorize them accordingly. Will collate them here first as a comment then we can discuss further whether the above tags are sufficient.
0xKai27
commented
1 year ago First run of categorising the tutorials according to the tags suggested:
Some comments:
Smart Contract tag. Conscious that this is what most people will search by but the concept itself is quite general and therefore doesn't really help with the filtering process. This is especially given the nature of most tutorials which focuses on application level use cases. DeFi tag, I have excluded purely creating ERC20 tokens guide and reserved it for more specific financial flows rather than the financialisation of assets. There are many ERC20 guides which would cause the DeFi tag to be less useful as a filter if included. Personally, I view ERC20 as more of a standard interface.Client tag is used to refer to protocol clients (e.g. geth, besu, lighthouse, teku, etc.). On the other hand, Client Libraries refer to browser(i.e. client) hosted libraries.Smart Contract tag. Refer to first point regarding concerns.
github-actions[bot]
commented
1 year ago This issue is stale because it has been open 45 days with no activity.
corwintines
commented
1 year ago Hey @0xKai27,
Overall like your thinking here. MY main concern like you had mentioned is the smart contract tag. It is very overused as you mentioned, and doesn't serve much of a purpose if basically everything has it. I think we maybe just get rid of it for now and see how it goes? Let me know what you think. I left some changes to the table you provided with this, and adding a few tags that I felt were missing, or removed ones that seemed unnecessary.
corwintines
commented
1 year ago Just some initial thoughts above, let me know what you think @0xKai27
github-actions[bot]
commented
4 months ago This issue is stale because it has been open 30 days with no activity.
corwintines
commented
3 months ago I believe we have finished this last year. Going to close this out for now.
Description
Related to the Q4 2022 roadmap (Epic #8491) and PR #8631 , propose the following changes to the tutorial tags for better clarity.
The main goal is to abstract specific implementations and categorise according to concepts for better contextualisation of specific use cases. As categorical names are constantly evolving with the industry, it is envisioned that the list below is sufficiently generalised to function as a framework to approach the tutorials. If implemented, it is expected that there will be a guide page specifically on how these categories are determined.
This issue was created with the intention of standardising tags and by extension, categorical standards in the Web3 space. As such, the below acts as guide points for the community to arrive at a preferred conceptual framework.
Proposed List:
BLOCKCHAIN ANALYSIS
BRIDGES
CLIENT LIBRARIES
DAO
DEFI
DESO
DEV TOOLS
GAMING
HARDWARE
LAYER 2
METAVERSE
NFT
ORACLES
PRIVACY
PROTOCOL
STORAGE
TOKEN STANDARDS
WALLETS
Other Considerations
Related Issues
8491
8631