Request for Documentation: Apps landing page improvements

[mickmister]

The landing page for Apps documentation could be improved in two ways:

• Consistency between:
  • "app" versus "App" - I believe we converged on "App" being the public-facing wording
  • "apps framework" versus "Apps Framework" "App framework". - I think we converged on "App Framework" for public-facing wording. 0/5 on what it should be, it should just be consistent.
• The blurriness of each image on the page is meant to showcase a given feature, by making the whole image blurry except for the focal point of the picture. It's not immediately clear what is being showcased. I think zooming in on the feature would be better than making the images blurry.

_Issue created from a Mattermost message by @mickmister._

[haardikdharma10]

This should be a quick fix.

1. Replacing all instances of "app" with "App".
2. Should it be "App framework" or "Apps Framework" @mickmister? Where can we discuss on it though?
3. Totally agree. For example, in "Add buttons to channel headers and post menus" section, it is very hard to figure out whether the focus is on the server named as "Marketing" or on the blue logo towards the left of search bar or both? This should indeed be changed by zooming in on the exact feature while still keeping the images blurry.

If any first-time contributor wants to take this up, please let us know by commenting on this issue, otherwise I'll fix this by tonight.

[mickmister]

Replacing all instances of "app" with "App".

:+1:

Should it be "App framework" or "Apps Framework" @mickmister? Where can we discuss on it though?

Honestly, I'm not sure if anyone knows this answer. It's called both names all the time. I can't find the original conversation where we decided on "App Framework". I'd say more recently, it's been called "Apps Framework" more often.

0/5 on what to call it, but as I said before we need to be consistent with our decision. I vote "App Framework" because that's what we decided earlier. @justinegeffen @aaronrothschild @jfrerich @DHaussermann Do you have any thoughts on this?

This should indeed be changed by zooming in on the exact feature while still keeping the images blurry.

1/5 Just my opinion, but I don't like the blurry images at all 😄 If the zoomed in images look better with the blur than without the blur then it seems fine to me.

[hanzei]

When @justinegeffen and I talked about the terminology for the docs, the decision was to use app, not App as it's not a proper name. On the other hand , App Framework is a Mattermost specific thing.

[justinegeffen]

^^ What @hanzei said. :)

An app is a universal term/thing so capitalizing it causes confusion. Even if it's "Mattermost App" we're still referring to the concept of an app and not an app specific to Mattermost. If it was specific it would be the "Mattermost something app".

I do think there may be some inconsistency in the docs which I am happy to address.

[jfrerich]

• The blurriness of each image on the page is meant to showcase a given feature, by making the whole image blurry except for the focal point of the picture. It's not immediately clear what is being showcased. I think zooming in on the feature would be better than making the images blurry.

I'm 4/5 on this change. I was looking through the site on mobile and earlier this week and notices the blurred images. At first glance with the small image, it appears as though the image just is not loading and I was incorrectly waiting for an image to render. :)

[haardikdharma10]

Great discussion everyone! @jfrerich, I have added the zoomed-in feature images here - https://github.com/mattermost/mattermost-developer-documentation/pull/954 🙂