Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

refactored code to align with vocabulary markup #862

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: vocab-refresh
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Queen-codes
Copy link
Contributor

@Queen-codes Queen-codes commented Dec 20, 2024

Fixes

Description

This PR refactors the code in page-with-toc.html to align with vocabulary markup.

Screenshots

Now(with old CSS commented out)
Screenshot 2024-12-20 at 06 51 33

Checklist

  • My pull request has a descriptive title (not a vague title like Update index.md).
  • My pull request targets the default branch of the repository (main or master).
  • My commit messages follow best practices.
  • My code follows the established code style of the repository.
  • I added or updated tests for the changes I made (if applicable).
  • I added or updated documentation (if applicable).
  • I tried running the project locally and verified that there are no
    visible errors.

Developer Certificate of Origin

For the purposes of this DCO, "license" is equivalent to "license or public domain dedication," and "open source license" is equivalent to "open content license or public domain dedication."

Developer Certificate of Origin
Developer Certificate of Origin
Version 1.1

Copyright (C) 2004, 2006 The Linux Foundation and its contributors.
1 Letterman Drive
Suite D4700
San Francisco, CA, 94129

Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this
license document, but changing it is not allowed.


Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1

By making a contribution to this project, I certify that:

(a) The contribution was created in whole or in part by me and I
    have the right to submit it under the open source license
    indicated in the file; or

(b) The contribution is based upon previous work that, to the best
    of my knowledge, is covered under an appropriate open source
    license and I have the right under that license to submit that
    work with modifications, whether created in whole or in part
    by me, under the same open source license (unless I am
    permitted to submit under a different license), as indicated
    in the file; or

(c) The contribution was provided directly to me by some other
    person who certified (a), (b) or (c) and I have not modified
    it.

(d) I understand and agree that this project and the contribution
    are public and that a record of the contribution (including all
    personal information I submit with it, including my sign-off) is
    maintained indefinitely and may be redistributed consistent with
    this project or the open source license(s) involved.

@Queen-codes Queen-codes requested review from a team as code owners December 20, 2024 06:21
@Queen-codes Queen-codes requested review from TimidRobot, possumbilities and Dhruvi16 and removed request for a team December 20, 2024 06:21
Copy link
Member

@TimidRobot TimidRobot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This branch looks different for me than the description. Note section navigation (Contributing Code):
Screenshot 2024-12-20 at 12-18-33 Pull Request Guidelines — Creative Commons Open Source

There should be support in Vocabulary to get the section navigation to look like https://creativecommons.org/mission/. Note section navigation (Who We Are):
Screenshot 2024-12-20 at 12-20-36 Who We Are - Creative Commons

@TimidRobot TimidRobot self-assigned this Dec 20, 2024
@Queen-codes
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @TimidRobot ,

I just checked, and yes, this branch matches your screenshot—likely due to the current local styles in the codebase. The screenshot in the description shows how it looks when using pure Vocabulary markup and styles, without the local styles applied. This is related to the efforts in #855.

I think the code markup in the section navigation seems to align with Vocabulary at the moment.

Let me know what you think!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: In review
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants