portal entry

Thank you for the article. I really wish they would follow WCAG2 standards, then the tables wouldn't exist and the bad color combinations would probably not exist. It really is a poor presentation choice (sort of like Tracker).

Comment by Stephen Walker

Hi Charlie, Thanks for reporting the bugs. We have inserted a Table of Contents along with numbered headings and have also modified the smaller document. We have also changed the tabular layout of the items so that it is in a better readable state. Please provide your thoughts on this. Thanks, Saurav

Comment by Saurav Ghosh

Listing the documents: 1. https://coldfusion.adobe.com/files/2018/04/Public_Beta_Whats-new-and-changed.pdf 2. https://coldfusion.adobe.com/files/2018/04/Public-Beta_Guide.pdf 3. https://coldfusion.adobe.com/files/2018/04/Public_Beta_Performance-Monitoring-Toolset.pdf 4. https://coldfusion.adobe.com/files/2018/04/Public_Beta_Server-Lockdown-Automation.pdf 5. https://coldfusion.adobe.com/files/2018/04/Public_Beta_Known-issues.pdf 6. https://coldfusion.adobe.com/files/2018/04/Public_Beta_Bugs-Fixed.pdf 7. https://coldfusion.adobe.com/files/2018/04/Public_Beta_Support-Matrix.pdf 8. https://coldfusion.adobe.com/files/2018/04/Public_Beta_System-Requirements.pdf 9. https://coldfusion.adobe.com/files/2018/04/Public_Beta_System-Requirements-ColdFusion-Builder.pdf

Comment by Saurav Ghosh

Saurav, These should not be in a table. Use h2 for the headings (e.g., Downloads), h3 for the sub-heading (e.g., ColdFusion 2018 Public Beta) and the lists below. Tables are for data, not layout.

Comment by Stephen Walker

I meant to add, if you keep it in the table, please update the table heading styles to something like this: table thead th { background: #333; color: #fff; }

Comment by Stephen Walker

Is it better Stephen?

Comment by Anit Kumar Panda

It is still in tables but at least it is legible now. Thank you!

Comment by Stephen Walker

Thanks, so much, Saurav. You've addressed nearly all the items I listed, in both how things appear in the beta page, and in the two primary what's new guides. Just a couple of minor quibbles that remain, and one new one: 1) First, I forgot to say this yesterday, but the smaller guide's first point should say it's the CF *Admin* that has a new UI, not CF itself. (The larger doc gets it right in the first section head.) 2) As for some things that remain, the JSON field feature is still named differently in the two docs: in the larger guide, in 5.7 it's "JSON field protection", while in the single-page doc it's still labelled "JSON field filtering". 3) Also, the order in the two docs is still not in sync, with some major and minor points in a different order in the smaller doc than they appear in the larger. I realize that the small one has some extra text for some points, so that you can't just "make the small one out of the TOC of the large one". And perhaps the order in the smaller one stresses some importance by its ordering, but I would suggest that the larger doc then be made to follow the order of the smaller one. 4) Finally, another thing I didn't think to ask yesterday: is it really intentional that the main beta page lists first the info about contributing to the portal? I'd really think that was not the primary thing. Indeed, one thing I had proposed was that it seemed having the docs first was more important than having the download links. Some may disagree, of course, wanting to "get to the files", but this is a prerelease, and people should know of (if not read) the docs before jumping at the downloads. :-) But I'd think logically it should be docs, then downloads, then contribution info. Again, I really appreciate your quick response to the original post. In fact, I want to edit it, to indicate how much of it has been addressed already. But in the past I found that if I edited a post here, it will be "removed" while it awaits "approval", which could confuse folks who may look for it--and you may even find that you can't locate it to offer another reply. Still, maybe that problem has been resolved, so I'll give it a shot. Worst case, you may see this and could nudge whoever is approving them. :-) I realize it may be overnight if they are working on India hours.

Comment by Charlie Arehart

Thanks a lot, Charlie. I've addressed points 1 and 2. For point 3, I am working on it. For point 4, that is a very valid argument. We'll see how we can enhance the experience of this page. Thanks, Saurav

Comment by Saurav Ghosh

Hi Adobe, Regarding "But in the past I found that if I edited a post here, it will be “removed” while it awaits “approval”, which could confuse folks who may look for it": I've experienced the same. Editing a post causes its removal until approval. Can you please whitelist us, so that we aren't affected by this removal/approval process? Thanks!, -Aaron

Comment by Aaron Neff

Hi Charlie, Stephen, Saurav and Anit, Thank you very much for getting the Beta page easier to read, and getting the download links into bulleted lists. I agree the order should be: 1) "Documentation" 2) "Report a bug" 3) "Downloads" IMO, the Beta's ROI would improve if prospective beta testers are clearly aware of #1 & #2 before reaching #3. Thanks!, -Aaron

Comment by Aaron Neff

+1

Comment by Charlie Arehart

Hi Charlie, I'm sorry to hijack your thread, but didn't want to create a separate discussion for the following point: The Beta page's "View all Discussion" button should probably say "View all Discussions" (plural instead of singular). Unless, of course, there will only be 1 discussion =P <a href="https://coldfusion.adobe.com/profile/SauravGhosh">Saurav Ghosh</a> and <a href="https://coldfusion.adobe.com/profile/Anit_Kumar">Anit Kumar Panda</a> can that be updated? Thanks!, -Aaron

Comment by Aaron Neff

This is fixed Aaron.

Comment by Anit Kumar Panda

Aaron, I would say 1) “Documentation” 2) “Downloads” 3) “Report a bug” One shouldn't report a bug, without trying the product, for which, it need to be downloaded first.

Comment by Anit Kumar Panda

Hi Anit, I do see your point. Our point is: Users may not scroll all the way down. Thus, some users may not be aware "Report a bug" exists. Thanks!, -Aaron

Comment by Aaron Neff

Charlie, can you try to editing your post now? " Again, I really appreciate your quick response to the original post. In fact, I want to edit it, to indicate how much of it has been addressed already. But in the past I found that if I edited a post here, it will be “removed” while it awaits “approval”, which could confuse folks who may look for it–and you may even find that you can’t locate it to offer another reply. "

Comment by Anit Kumar Panda

Sadly, no. I just edited it and when I submitted it for review, it did disappear, until you just now approved it. so the problem remains.

Comment by Charlie Arehart

Can you please try one more time?

Comment by Anit Kumar Panda