►
Description
Weekly sync call of the Static Site Editor group focused on product and design efforts
A
A
My
goal
would
be
to
have
sub
epics
under
that
strategy,
epic,
which
I
linked
in
the
agenda
that
each
represent.
You
know
a
main
topic
or
main
priority
or
area
that
we're
going
to
work
on
things
like
searchable
settings
or
just
settings,
hierarchy
and
information
architecture,
things
that
will
contain
sub
x
and
won't
necessarily
be
done
in
one
milestone,
even
but
where
we
can
collect
all
the
research
outcomes
and
we
can
define
success
metrics
and
then
the
idea
being
that
this
parent,
epic
would
be
maybe
split
up.
A
Maybe
there'll
be
a
one,
epic
that
we
don't
commit
to
completing
in
this
engagement,
where
it's
just
like
kind
of
everything
else
or
longer
term
projects,
but
the
goal
being
to
define.
What's
that?
What's
that
finite
period,
where
we're
owning
this
category
and
what
does
it
look
like
when
we
hand
it
off?
So
I'm
still
working
on
that?
A
It's
mostly
a
shell
right
now,
there's
no
information
in
many
of
these
epics
and
there's
some
that
I
still
need
to
to
link
in
here,
but
that'll
be
the
space
to
look
for
over
the
next
four
five
days.
I'd
like
to
get
at
least
a
framework
in
here
with
with
basic
information
before
we
have
our
kickoff
call
at
the
end
of
the
week.
So
that's
my
goal
for
for
this
week
a
lot
of
these
epics
and
issues
are
already
done.
A
I'm
just
moving
them
into
the
right
place
to
to
we're
not
done,
but
you
know
they're
already
written,
so
I
don't
have
a
ton
more
work
to
do.
I
just
need
to
kind
of
make
sense
of
it
all
and
actually
michael
the
spreadsheet
you
sent
me
where
you
broke
up.
Design
tasks
and
stuff
has
been
helpful
too,
to
kind
of
parse
through
themes
and
and
fit
them
into
these
epics.
So
I'm
using
that
as
a
reference
as
well.
B
B
C
A
B
Exists
in
bugs
and
everything
because,
from
my
perspective,
what
I
was
looking
for
was
similar
issues.
So
you
know,
if,
like
three
or
four
issues
are
basically
kind
of
around
the
same
theme,
if
I
could
tackle
one
of
them,
I
could
like
take
care
of
four
and
a
lot
of
that
falls
into
the
standardization
settings.
Ui.
B
A
lot
of
people
have
questions
on
like
oh,
should
it
be
this
heading
or
that
heading
it's
like
okay,
yeah,
we'll,
probably
just
need
to
solve
this
and
then
use
these
issues
as
a
rubric.
As
in
like
okay,
the
audit
that
I'm
currently
working
on
right
now,
I
didn't
even
find
the
patterns
and
then
saying
cool.
This
is
what
we're
gonna
go
forward
with,
and
what
I'm
going
to
use
as
a
test
is
all
these
outstanding
issues.
As
I
can
answer
this
scenario
kind
of
answer,
this
scenario:
can
it
answer
this
scenario?
C
B
Like
the
searching
and
settings
and
contextual
access
to
settings,
you
know,
I
know
catherine
has
some
research
going
on
about
whether
we
should
place
settings
within
features
or
have
a
parent's
settings
so,
but
I'm
kind
of
looking
at
more
of
like
a
a
journey.
You
know
if
we
have
like
feature
settings
should
you
be
like
if
you
were
to
go
to
settings?
C
C
B
Simplifying
the
top
area
so
that
instant
level
of
features
and
projects
and
groups
kind
of
get
aligned
to
one
another,
and
there
could
be
some
questions
that
come
out
there.
That
could
tease
into
a
deeper
problem,
validation
questions.
But
I
think
those
are
the
things
you
know
on
my
agenda
that
I
feel
like.
I
could
make
a
move
on
this
week
to
make
some
progress.
C
B
I
think
I
think
the
navigation
bar
is
something
I'm
working
on
this
week,
so
13.6
for
sure,
contextual
access
is,
I
think,
going
to
be
worked
on
from
a
design
perspective,
but
won't
go
heavy
into
it
until
I'll
find
more
information
from
you,
because
you're
doing
research
on
the
features
and
settings
and
there's
a
bunch
of
ux
placements
and
features
in
13.7
that
you're
kind
of
doing
so
issue.
331.
C
Yeah,
so
this
one's
a
this
one's,
a
tricky
one.
So
it's
been,
it's
been
open
for
quite
some
time,
and
a
lot
of
people
have
linked
similar
issues
to
it.
So
what
I
actually
plan
to
do
it's
a
bit
of
a
problem.
Validation,
one
is
basically
to
start
with
kind
of
understanding
the
feedback
we've
gathered
so
far,
so
just
in
related
studies
and
other
description
of
the
problem
and
then
also
answering
the
questions
that
are
in
that
issue,
description,
which
are
basically
around
what
are
the
features
that
people
need
to
move
like
need.
C
More
of
that
contextual
access
for
and
what
are
some
features.
What
are
some
workflows
or
features
that
maybe
make
more
sense
in
where
they
currently
exist,
kind
of
understanding
how
people
are
navigating
settings
currently?
So
I
think
it's
a
more
of
a
problem,
validation
and
probably
a
benchmarking
of
the
current
experience.
C
So
I
haven't
been
able
to
start
that
one
yet,
but
that's
what
I
planned
for
thirteen
seven
and
I
would
say
that
it's
it's
a
problem,
validation,
one,
but
I
also
think
it
may
not
be
a
problem
validation
in
the
sense
that
it's
should
we
or
should
we
not
do
this.
It's
more
of
like
how
understanding
more
about
the
problem.
C
You
know
what
I
mean,
so
I
would
say
if
you
plan
to
get
started
earlier
on
the
proposal,
then
that
also
makes
sense,
because
I
do
think
that's
likely
the
direction
we'll
be
exploring,
but,
for
example,
in
talks
with
marcel
he
has
the
question
around
like.
Are
we
discussing
whether
we're
duplicating
those
locations
or
is
it
kind
of
all
or
nothing?
You
know
all
settings
living
in
that
settings
section
for
all
settings
distributed
throughout
the
left,
nav
or
is
it
somewhere
in
between?
C
B
Cool,
so
that
kind
of
helps
me
understand
the
priority.
So
for
me,
based
off
that,
I
think
the
priority
is
the
navigation
bar
thing
search
within
settings
because
part
of
that
could
be
done
independent
and
it's
it's
off
the
work
of
like
the
settings,
audit
kind
of
like
these
new
patterns,
the
expand
collapse
stuff.
B
What
do
we
move
forward
with
and
that
will
probably
dictate
certain
settings,
so
this
is
like
inline
in
the
settings
pages
we're
not
talking
about
the
global
search
settings,
that's
kind
of
like
a
different
problem
as
well,
yeah
and
then,
and
then
the
contextual
access,
I
think,
is
for
a
good
solution
on
that.
Yeah
I'll,
probably
I
think
in
our
catch-ups
from
time
to
time
and
as
you
kick
off
research
around
features
and
settings
that
that'll
buy
me
some
time
to
test
out
some
ideas
and
as
if
we're
going.
C
B
Those
solution,
problem,
validation
sessions-
maybe
you
know
as
we
go
through,
we
can
just
like
send
check
the
designs
as
we
go
and
then
we'll
schedule
like
solution,
validation
for
that
for
13.8,
so
maybe
I'll
I'll
create
a
thing
for
that
for
13.8
and
13.7
is
search
and
settings
and
navigation,
bars
and
groups
is
something
that
will
overlap.
Thirteen
six
thirteen
seven,
because
we're
already
on,
like
the
tenth
so
yeah.
C
I
will
plan
the
same
with
navigation
bar
because
we're
trying
to
benchmark
that
as
well,
but
then
I'll
probably
go
for
understanding
that
placement
of
settings
first
and
then,
since
the
search
of
settings
is
more,
I
think
it's
exploratory,
but
also
something
you
can
test
in
a
prototype.
It's
something
that
doesn't
currently
exist.
So
it's
something
we
don't
need
to
benchmark
per
se.
So
I
think
that
makes
sense
for
you
to
go
ahead
with
that.
C
A
Cool
that
all
sounds
great
I
didn't
want
to
interrupt.
I
don't
really
have
much
to
add,
although
I
I
did
want
to
say,
I
was
going
to
jump
in
before
and
say
I
finally
got
a
chance
to
watch
that
video
of
your
conversation
with
nick,
I
watched
it
late
last
week.
I
can't
remember
what
day
you
posted
it
michael,
but
that
was
really
helpful
as
far
as
talking
about
that
nav
and
making
distinctions
between
instance,
level,
group
level
and
project
level,
settings.
A
I'm
real
excited
about
your
thought
process
there
I
just
wanted
to
let
you
know
that
I
found
that
video
to
be
to
be
really
helpful
and
anybody
watching
this
it's
in
our
youtube
playlist,
so
feel
free
to
check
it
out
the
I
I'm
fully
supportive
of
moving
forward
with
that
approach
of
consolidating
those
menus.
I
my
only
concern
is:
what
do
we
call
that
button?
A
I
don't
think
calling
it
menu
like
the
actual
physical
label
or
you
know,
like
the
actual
word,
that's
on
the
button,
so
I
I
liked.
I
think
you
showed
a
concept
where
it
was
the
name
of
the
instance
and
then
you
clicked
on
it
and
it
showed
those
things
which
was
really
nice,
but
I
think
that's
more
elegant
if
you
have
either
multiple
instances
or
if
it's
a
self-hosted
instance,
but
if
it's
gitlab.com
is
that
going
to
work
and.
A
A
C
A
We
were
to
solve
this.
How
many
issues
exist
out
there
that
reference
this
or
related
to
this
or
could
be
solved
by
this,
because
I
think
we
had
this
kind
of
blanket
understanding.
Statics,
like
editor
group,
was
going
to
take
over
the
settings
in
nav,
but
there
were
these
epics
that
were
already
created.
These
really
well
researched
epics
and
they
had
priority
one
two,
three
four
priority.
Four
was
just
like
a
bug
list
of
catch-all
like
ux
polish,
and
we
said
you
know
we're
just
not
going
to
focus
on
that.
A
But
in
reality
what
we
are
is
we're
we're
solving
bigger
problems,
we're
not
just
going
to
use
it
as
a
punch
list,
but
by
solving
those
bigger
problems,
we're
probably
going
to
address
at
least
a
percentage
of
those
ux
issues.
So
it's
it
was
getting
uncomfortable
for
me
to
discuss
in
that
kind
of
a
stark
framework
of
saying,
like
we're,
not
gonna,
think
about
bugs,
because
we
are,
you
know,
we're
obviously
thinking
about
bugs
and
anything.
A
That's
a
really
high
priority
is
worth
fixing,
but
what
we're
not
doing-
and
I
think
I'm
gonna-
try
and
put
this
into
the
epic
because
we're
not
just
gonna,
try
and
clear
out
a
backlog
one
by
one,
we're
thinking
about
more
thematic
and
structural
problems
that
will
solve
six
or
seven
issues
at
a
time
rather
than
just
like.
Oh
this
one
tab
needs
to
get
renamed
or
like
this.
One
area
of
settings
is
using
an
inconsistent
pattern
right.
You
know,
that's
that's
a
band-aid
approach
that
we're
not
looking
to
take
so
anyway.
C
C
B
Cool
yeah
next
thing
has
a
lot
of
changes
in
them
and
it
for
for
the
solution.
Validation
right
now
will
probably
be
the
very
stripped
back
version
of
just
consolidating
things,
but
yeah
at
the
moment.
It's
just
basically
the
top
nav
gets,
gets
changed
and
I'll
loop.
You
in
on
that.
Once
I
create
this,
create
the
issue
and
then
the
questions
around
it.
A
A
B
A
Excited
about
it
with
this
new
consolidated,
editor
group,
I
think
it
fits
in
very
well-
and
I
think
I
mentioned
this
on
the
earlier
call.
I
can't
remember
if
it
was
recorded
or
not,
but
for
the
record
I
think,
in
the
next
two
three
weeks
we
should
have
a
deep
dive
with
the
editor
engineers,
where
enrique
really
goes
into
the
thought
process
on
that
presents
it
and
make
sure
everybody
understands
where
we're
coming
from.
A
I
think
it'd
be
a
good
way
to
spread
the
knowledge
and
get
some
feedback
from
the
engineers
on
that
team
and
then
vice
versa.
We
should
do
the
same
thing
for
someone
from
the
web
ide
group
to
present
sorry
people
opening
the
door
behind
me
present
the
sort
of
technical
foundations
of
the
web
ide
understand.
You
know
the
underpinnings
of
that
and
and
take
a
deep
dive
for
the
sake
of
the
static
site,
editor
engineers
who
will
be
working
on
it
as
well.