Re-build the JSON Schema Implementations page - (Design)

[benjagm]

With the release of the new JSON Schema website, we still have plenty of range of improvement in the Implementations page. A new data-driven page, with filters and more call to actions to add implementations or try bowtie will improve the UX and the impact of this very important page.

Current page: https://json-schema.org/implementations

Inspirations:

• https://tools.openapis.org/
• LFX Landscapes: https://landscape.prestodb.io/card-mode

Live Low-fi Prototype: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1cCjQO0tdUqf74iEtYYv7E2dHxYyZbbzL_sEQ1_64W1Y/edit?usp=sharing

Slack thread: https://json-schema.slack.com/archives/CT8QRGTK5/p1697620659557929

[benjagm]

Feedback provided by @Relequestual on Slack:

• For filters
  • When on Desktop, have them across the top, and sticky (stay when you scroll, and not on mobile)
  • For mobile, a filter button which opens an overlay with the filter options (like the main menu)

I don't want to take up more horizontal space. Some implementations have a lot of text, so the small width design might not work.

Should default to only showing draft-07 and above, but make it clear that a filter is enabled.

For categories, we should have some information that details what they mean. How and where we display that data can be discussed.

I know this is more of a technical detail, bot for many of the non-validation implementations, we do not know what drafts/versions are supported. We should have a filter for "unknown" or "undefined".

A link for adding an implementation is a good idea. Where we position that if we choose to put filters horizontally about the content, I'm not sure.

I think having a filter and maybe a column for Bowtie report ("Bowtie report (compliance)") would make sense. We would need to explain what that means.

For the "adding your tool", maybe we want "Something missing/wrong?" to include updates or changes and not just new tools.

Could do:

• We may want to add a filter for licence which is "All OSI approved licences"
• When selecting language/s, show number of results based on other filters (or grey out 0 result options)
• Reset all filters button
• Options in "drafts" to select all "modern" aka draft-07 and up, in one go

Aside: Do we want to say "drafts" or "versions"?
Under versions, we could say "draft-07" etc, but then "2019-09" and "2020-12" without "draft".
Great start! =]

[big-andy-coates]

Hi @benjagm,

What's the plan for the Benchmarks section on the existing implementations page?

I ask as I totally missed there were benchmarks when I was researching which JVM based validator implementation to use (and ended up writing my own).

I know we're moving towards Bowtie:heart: for functional comparison, but the performance comparison these benchmarks provide are also very useful.

Until Bowtie covers performance testing as well, it would be great if the new page could make the presence of these benchmarks more visible.

The new page is data-driven, so maybe there should be a section in the data for benchmarks, which can list the implementations they cover. Then use this to add a column to the table of validators with links to all benchmarks that cover a specific implementation.

The same pattern could be used to highlight any benchmarks the community has written for other sections, e.g. schema generators, etc.

An alternative would be to allow each implementation to list the benchmarks that are available for it. Though we should be careful to not allow implementations to remove unfavourable benchmarks without good cause.

Thoughts?

[benjagm]

Then use this to add a column to the table of validators with links to all benchmarks that cover a specific implementation.

I like a lot you proposal of a Benchmark column with Bowtie and the rest of benchmark tools like yours. I think we can do it and we'll have that in mind when designing the data model and when building the new page.

[Relequestual]

Hey @big-andy-coates. I think I understand what you're asking here. You're asking that, for benchmarking solutions/tools, you'd like for there to be space in the data for listing what implementations have been benchmarked?

The space for columns is pretty limited. Very much open to ideas though.
There aren't many benchmarking solutions. Do you think it would be enough to just add "has benchmark" with a link to the benchmarking section appended to the "about" column data?

[big-andy-coates]

Yes, that would work. Ideally, linking to the correct language section of the benchmarks

[big-andy-coates]

Would be great if it could link to the benchmark section, with it pre-filtered to only the benchmarks that cover it.

Though, given the small number of benchmarks it might not be worth the effort