[SPIKE] How will the Edit Check platform be kept in sync with the Wikimedia Design System (Codex)?
Closed, ResolvedPublic
Actions

Assigned To

Authored By

	ppelberg
	Mar 22 2024, 4:59 PM

Description

Inspired by the Abuse Filter Extension (and projects like it), Edit Check seeks to empower people to develop new Edit Checks and Structured Tasks.

To do so, the Editing Team is venturing to build [at least] two pieces of infrastructure:

API (T360591)
Design Framework (T364505)

This task is meant to guide us to a decision about how the "design framework" we are developing in T364505 will remain in coherence with Codex, the Wikimedia design system.[i]

Decision(s) to be made

Decision to be made	Path forward	Status
How will the Editing Team ensure the design framework we are developing in T364505 will cohere with Codex, the Wikimedia design system?	Editing will ensure the Edit Check design framework coheres with the Wikimedia Design System by: 1) Conforming to design guidelines and using Codex design tokens and components and implementing them in OOUI, 2) In cases where the Wikimedia Design System lacks the tokens/components necessary to develop an experience Edit Check requires, Editing will work with DST to figure out how to implement the missing tokens/components. Note: at some future point, we may cease adding new features to OOUI. Although, that point has not yet been defined.	✅ CONFIRMED by the Editing and Design System Teams in T360801#9787238 and T360801#9802382

Relevant people/roles

WARNING: Please consider this section subject to change until this disclaimer is removed.

References

i. Where the "Wikimedia design system" includes the design style guide, visual language, interaction, and content guidelines.

Related Objects
Search...

Status	Assigned	Task
Open	None	T265163 Create a system to encode best practices into editing experiences
Open	None	T360799 [EPIC] Empower developers to author new Edit Checks and Structured Tasks
Open	None	T364505 Develop a design framework that empowers people to author new Edit Checks and Structured Tasks
Resolved	Esanders	T360801 [SPIKE] How will the Edit Check platform be kept in sync with the Wikimedia Design System (Codex)?

Event Timeline

ppelberg created this task.Mar 22 2024, 4:59 PM

ppelberg added a subscriber: nayoub.Mar 22 2024, 9:07 PM

ppelberg added a subscriber: RHo.

As we are tightly integrated into VE, the only sensible option here is OOUI.

In T360801#9658296, @Esanders wrote:

As we are tightly integrated into VE, the only sensible option here is OOUI.

While we may end up doing exactly as you're describing above, @Esanders, I'd like to keep this ticket open to hold us accountable for documenting the decision we come to through conversations with @RHo, @CCiufo-WMF, and other people this decision will impact.

ppelberg updated the task description. (Show Details)Wed, May 8, 7:13 PM

ppelberg moved this task from Untriaged to Upcoming on the Editing-team board.

ppelberg added a parent task: T364505: Develop a design framework that empowers people to author new Edit Checks and Structured Tasks.

ppelberg removed a parent task: T360799: [EPIC] Empower developers to author new Edit Checks and Structured Tasks.

ppelberg added subscribers: SCherukuwada, MMiller_WMF.

In T360801#9781800, @ppelberg wrote:

In T360801#9658296, @Esanders wrote:

As we are tightly integrated into VE, the only sensible option here is OOUI.

While we may end up doing exactly as you're describing above, @Esanders, I'd like to keep this ticket open to hold us accountable for documenting the decision we come to through conversations with @RHo, @CCiufo-WMF, and other people this decision will impact.

I would reframe the task to be about using the *design system* as a whole, which includes the design style guide which includes visual language, interaction and content guidelines, which IMO should be adopted as the primary as a given, and in a sense distinguished/pulled out from decision about Vue vs OOJS.

ppelberg updated the task description. (Show Details)Thu, May 9, 6:59 PM

ppelberg added a subscriber: VPuffetMichel.

Summarizing our last discussion: while it may not make sense for Editing to use the Codex Vue.js components for Edit Check because it is so tightly coupled with VisualEditor, there is still an opportunity to leverage parts of Codex the design system, as Rita notes above. This could be as simple as conforming to design guidelines and using Codex design tokens (which are already being consumed by OOUI) to ensure compatibility with other features like dark mode. This would mostly be design-led but could have implications for engineering if new (custom) components need to be created for Edit Check that don't already exist within OOUI or VisualEditor.

This task seeks to answer which "user interface library" should be used, which technically would be OOUI. I think T364505 is where DST can work with Editing to ensure as much consistency with Codex as possible. If Editing is in agreement, we can probably resolve this task but should still separately document this decision and how to move forward with VisualEditor in a world where OOUI is entering "maintenance mode" and won't be receiving any new features.

ppelberg renamed this task from [SPIKE] What user interface library will new Structured Tasks and Edit Checks use? to [SPIKE] How will the Edit Check platform be kept in sync with the Wikimedia Design System (Codex)?.Wed, May 15, 10:34 PM

ppelberg updated the task description. (Show Details)

In T360801#9782016, @RHo wrote:

I would reframe the task to be about using the *design system* as a whole, which includes the design style guide which includes visual language, interaction and content guidelines, which IMO should be adopted as the primary as a given, and in a sense distinguished/pulled out from decision about Vue vs OOJS.

Great spot and sounds great to me, @RHo. I've taken an initial pass at reframing this task in the way you described.

Please boldly edit if you see ways to improve it.

ppelberg updated the task description. (Show Details)Wed, May 15, 10:40 PM

In T360801#9787238, @CCiufo-WMF wrote:

Summarizing our last discussion: while it may not make sense for Editing to use the Codex Vue.js components for Edit Check because it is so tightly coupled with VisualEditor, there is still an opportunity to leverage parts of Codex the design system, as Rita notes above. This could be as simple as conforming to design guidelines and using Codex design tokens (which are already being consumed by OOUI) to ensure compatibility with other features like dark mode. This would mostly be design-led but could have implications for engineering if new (custom) components need to be created for Edit Check that don't already exist within OOUI or VisualEditor.

All that you described here sounds good to me; thank you for summarizing, @CCiufo-WMF.

RE the path forward you proposed ("This task seeks to answer which..."), you can expect a response from me before this week is over. I'd like to check in with the wider Editing Team before doing so...

In T360801#9802394, @ppelberg wrote:

In T360801#9787238, @CCiufo-WMF wrote:

Summarizing our last discussion: while it may not make sense for Editing to use the Codex Vue.js components for Edit Check because it is so tightly coupled with VisualEditor, there is still an opportunity to leverage parts of Codex the design system, as Rita notes above. This could be as simple as conforming to design guidelines and using Codex design tokens (which are already being consumed by OOUI) to ensure compatibility with other features like dark mode. This would mostly be design-led but could have implications for engineering if new (custom) components need to be created for Edit Check that don't already exist within OOUI or VisualEditor.

All that you described here sounds good to me; thank you for summarizing, @CCiufo-WMF.

RE the path forward you proposed ("This task seeks to answer which..."), you can expect a response from me before this week is over. I'd like to check in with the wider Editing Team before doing so...

@CCiufo-WMF this message confirms that the Editing Team is aligned with the path forward you described in T360801#9787238.

I've taken a pass at synthesizing what you laid out in the task description's ===Decision(s) to be made section and I'm going to resolve this task as a result.

Please boldly re-open this if anything about what I've described seems unclear/unexpected!

ppelberg reopened this task as Open.Fri, May 17, 11:57 PM

ppelberg closed this task as Resolved.