I believe this makes the code less brittle, and also makes it a bit
more obvious what these strings are meant to represent.
Change-Id: I0c5cdaa0b94b525ad3e65278ca9bf088f480df40
Same as Icfa8215 where we removed the …_suffix messages.
This patch is not blocked on anything according to CodeSearch:
https://codesearch.wmcloud.org/search/?q=cite_references%3F_link_prefix
According to GlobalSearch there are 2 usages we need to talk about:
https://global-search.toolforge.org/?q=.®ex=1&namespaces=8&title=Cite.references%3F.link.prefix.*
zh.wiktionary replaces "cite_ref-" with "_ref-", and "cite_note-"
with "_note-", i.e. they did nothing but remove the word "cite". This
happened in 2006, with no explanation.
ka.wikibooks and ka.wikiquote replace "cite_note-" with "_შენიშვნა-",
which translates back to "_note-". One user did this in 2007,
16 seconds apart.
It appears like both are attempts to localize what can be localized,
no matter if it's really necessary or not.
https://zh.wiktionary.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Shibo77?offset=20060510https://ka.wikiquote.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Trulala?offset=20070219
Note how one user experimented with an "a" in some of the edits to
see what effect the change might have, to imediatelly revert it.
The modifications don't really have an effect on anything, except on
the anchors in the resulting <a href="#_ref-5"> and <sup id="_ref-5">
HTML. It might also be briefly visible in the browser's address bar
when such a link is clicked. We can only assume the two users did this
to make the URL appear shorter (?). A discussion apparently never
happened. Bot users are inactive.
Both pieces of HTML are generated in the Cite code. Removing the
messages will change all places the same time. All links will
continue to work. The only possible effect is that hard-coded
weblinks to an individual reference will link to the top of the
article instead. But:
a) This is extremely unlikely to happen. There is no reason to link
to a reference from outside of the article.
b) Such links are not guaranteed to work anyway as they can break
for a multitude of other reasons, e.g. the <ref> being renamed,
removed, or replaced.
c) Even if such a link breaks, it still links to the correct article.
There is also no on-wiki code on zh.wiktionary that would do anything
with the shortened prefix:
https://zh.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?search=insource%3A%2F_%28ref%7Cnote%29-%2F&title=Special%3A%E6%90%9C%E7%B4%A2&profile=advanced&fulltext=1&ns2=1&ns4=1&ns8=1&ns10=1&ns12=1&ns828=1&ns2300=1
I argue this is safe to remove, even without contacting the mentioned
communities first.
Bug: T321217
Change-Id: I160a119710dc35679dbdc2f39ddf453dbd5a5dfa
Same arguments as in Iafa2412. The one reason to use more detailled
per-method @covers annotations is to avoid "accidental coverage"
where code is marked as being covered by tests that don't assert
anything that would be meaningful for this code. This is especially a
problem with older, bigger classes with lots of side effects.
But all the new classes we introduced over the years are small, with
predictable, local effects.
That's also why we keep the more detailled @covers annotations for
the original Cite class.
Bug: T353227
Bug: T353269
Change-Id: I69850f4d740d8ad5a7c2368b9068dc91e47cc797
Two problems:
1. Manipulating globals directly affects all following tests. They
are not independent from each other. This problem can be seen in
CiteTest.
2. Some test cases in testValidateRef don't test what you think.
For example, the test for a conflicting "extends" + "follow" was not
failing because of the conflict but because "extends" was disabled
and disallowed.
Change-Id: Iaa4e1f3f3222155d59984e577cba3f0b8dec40c3
This patch makes only sense together with I5a64ac4 where it is split
from. See I5a64ac4 for details.
The idea is that this patch just re-arranges the code without making
any changes to how the code behaves. This leaves a minimal change
behind that's much easier to revert, if needed.
Bug: T298278
Change-Id: Ie78313b7f3ac1ec7bce5ac7512e60a3bb011480a
This patch does two things:
1. The "normalization" function was never only doing normalization,
but also all the necessary HTML encoding. This is now more visible
and split into two separate functions.
2. To make this easier we change the order slightly. Because of this
the normalization step must now consider spaces. Before spaces have
been converted to underscores by escapeIdForLink.
The results are all the exact same as before.
This is split from I5a64ac4 to make that easier to review.
Bug: T298278
Change-Id: I9435a2ddaa21559e29587c58b7523103141467f7
This is a mistake that exists in this codebase for who knows how
long.
Cite mis-uses the messaging system a lot for internal things we still
want to customize somehow, but are not labels that will ever be shown
on the screen. The prefix/suffix messages in this patch are meant to be
part of the HTML in id="…" attributes. Prefix/suffix must be a static
plain text strings. Using e.g. {{GENDER}} or {{PLURAL}} in these
messages is not even possible because there is no $1 parameter to use.
Note how all other similar messages already use ->plain().
A few wikis override these messages, but stick to the plain-text
convention, as they should:
https://global-search.toolforge.org/?q=.®ex=1&namespaces=8&title=Cite.*reference.*fix
This will continue to work.
This has minor performance implications. Fetching these messages is
faster if we can skip transformations.
Bug: T321217
Change-Id: I7969c255fe4ce897e904897081da5f52678721aa
