The code (prior to d25825a754) assumed
that level 3+ headings would always follow a level 2 heading or the
placeholder heading, but we don't generate a placeholder heading if
there are no comments in section zero.
Add more tests to confirm that comments under level 3+ headings (that
are not sub-headings of level 2), and level 1 headings, are ignored
when generating notifications, and do not mess with normal headings.
Bug: T288775
Change-Id: Ic57b56752a4797cb01234f66e0ed7b849752bd70
Adding test cases in a separate commit to make it easier to review how
the test results change after I98fbca8e.
* For mentions, the 'mentioned-users' extra parameter is copied to our
event (which is then used to avoid duplicate notifications).
* For user talk page edit, nothing special happens right now (we use
the target page title to avoid duplicate notifications, but this is
not apparent from the test case, since page titles are not present).
Bug: T281590
Bug: T253082
Change-Id: I153e7735f63f1e2643ed881281d807313cd699c3
In case 4 and case 6, no notifications are expected. In all other
cases we now get the expected notifications.
Bug: T285528
Change-Id: I9e813bb3a053bc1232783f9eae1ad75672b4fa7e
Adding test cases in a separate commit to make it easier to review how
the test results change.
As expected, in every case, no notifications are generated right now.
Bug: T285528
Change-Id: I25308754112c521d2db8c54ef0c82373456d9e31
The user interface only allows you to subscribe to level 2 headings.
But we would generate events for whatever heading was the closest,
If it was e.g. level 3, no one would receive that notification.
Now we generate events for the closest level 2 heading, or we don't
generate the event at all if there isn't one (if the only headings are
of level 3 and below, or level 1, or if the comment is added before
the first heading on the page).
Bug: T286736
Change-Id: Iae99853070e353ab81c9cc29ef1d53c877adfc66
The issue occurred when replying to a comment consisting of multiple
list items, starting with a <dt> (instead of the expected <dd>), so
that the comment is considered to be unindented.
Modifier tried to add the reply directly inside the list (<dl>) rather
than inside the last list item (<dt>), which caused it to be confused
about indentation levels and try to un-indent more times than there
were indentations.
The simplest solution, given the existing code, is to add the reply
outside the list instead, in a new list. This results in a "list gap"
(<dl><dt>...</dt><dd>...</dd></dl><dl><dd>...</dd></dl>), but I think
it's acceptable for this rare case.
There are separate tests cases for old Parser and for Parsoid HTML,
because they parse the original wikitext differently (with the old
Parser producing HTML with a list gap too).
Bug: T279445
Change-Id: Ie0ee960e7090cf051ee547b480c980e9530eda51
We added it because the initial designs for the subscribe action were
much easier to implement like this, and topic "containers" (T269950)
would have required it.
However, the latest design of the subscribe action will not need it
(T279149), and topic containers are still very far away, so let's
remove it for now.
Bug: T280433
Change-Id: I21a23e9bea43f24d265750926fbd62b99038d3f1
The existing comment IDs can't be used to find the same comment on
a different revision or page (when it's transcluded), because they
depend on the comment's parent and its position on the page.
Comment names depend only on the author and timestamp. The trade-off
is that they can't distinguish comments posted within the same minute,
or in the same edit, so we will still need the IDs sometimes.
Prefer using comment names when replying, if they're not ambiguous.
This fixes T273413 and T275821.
Heading names depend on the author and timestamp of the oldest comment.
This way we don't have to detect changes to the heading text, but we
can't distinguish headings without any comments.
Bug: T274685
Bug: T273413
Bug: T275821
Change-Id: Id85c50ba38d1e532cec106708c077b908a3fcd49
Longer, but follows the style guide and less likely to conflict.
We need to account for init classes in the cache being around for
a while.
Change-Id: I738bc93393850db320fdbda2b003ca8ac40556da
The code we're testing already produces a string of serialized HTML,
no need to parse and re-serialize it.
Also, we recently learned that the precise format matters here
(T274709), and now this test *actually* covers the fix for that bug.
Follow-up to 5b26e9664b.
As a downside, this test might now spuriously fail if the format of
the output of Parsoid's XMLSerializer changes. Hopefully that won't
happen too often.
Change-Id: I69b514f545e47dcb437fb39a83edb8e2f19ed99b
Now it detect signatures generated by en.wp's {{Undated}} template,
and signatures of people who do weird stuff to the timestamps.
Bug: T275938
Change-Id: I27b07f6786ca5433a3c02a5fe68e4716d41401bb
The horrendous 11-line if() condition did not correctly handle
signatures wrapped in inline formatting markup, like <small>.
Instead, implement this logic in the code for skipping to the end
of a paragraph, which didn't exist yet when that condition was
added, but seems like a much better place to check this now.
Bug: T275934
Change-Id: I5cccff889b5e15b5f8fde0538bf4bccb22e762cf
This code expected $container->firstChild to be a
<div class="mw-parser-output">, but that element is not present
when we're running on HTML to be saved in parser cache.
We ended up inserting the marker inside whatever node was the
first on the page, and if it was a <style> element, both our
marker and the styles would be lost when serializing, like in
6c7a0ca9a2.
When we're running on final HTML, the marker will now be outside
of <div class="mw-parser-output">, but that seems to be fine. Only
early versions of I4e60fdbc098c1a74757d6e60fec6bcf8e5db37c1 had
problems with that (see comments on patchset 41), but it works now.
The added test case also covers the fix for T274709.
Bug: T275440
Change-Id: I38d45dd8686919be51e1d307ded12b0afe185eb5
Top-level comments that start or end with a list (inconsistent
indentation) would not have triggered the logic for detecting
wrappers.
Bug: T273692
Change-Id: Idcb4eed73e391f5f86eca2eb05cb3cea0d86f30a
For a moment I doubted if we handle this case correctly, but in fact
I didn't botch that code *this* badly.
Change-Id: I5a9d142e4bd97ac40aa388bb43b65ab1286e3f18
* Ignore rendering-transparent nodes between discussion comments.
* Improve isRenderingTransparentNode() so that <link> nodes
representing TemplateStyles are not considered transparent,
otherwise this would undo ae920b831f.
Using a regexp from Parsoid.
Bug: T272746
Change-Id: I0b3c3251156ba6c4826abf5ba44ea93f80ebc01d
Add yet another tree walking utility: CommentUtils::linearWalk().
Unlike TreeWalker, it allows handling the beginnings and ends of nodes
separately – kind of like parsing a XML token stream, or kind of like
VisualEditor's linear model.
(Add unit tests for this utility. The simple.html test case is copied
from [VisualEditor/VisualEditor]/demos/ve/pages/simple.html.)
Use this utility to stop skipping when we reach either a closing or
opening block node tag. Previously we'd skip over such tags inside
nested "transparent" nodes (like <a>, <del>, or apparently <font>).
Bug: T271385
Change-Id: I201a942eb3a56335e84d94e150ec2c33f8b4f4e0
As a result of 0fc71f60cd, "empty" text
nodes (containing only whitespace) at the end of the comment may be
inside the comment's range, and trying to ignore them caused the
ranges not to match and the frame not to be detected.
Now the code works whether they're inside the comment's range or not.
Add a test case for wrapped discussion comments with HTML comments and
with whitespace.
Bug: T250126
Bug: T268407
Change-Id: I2217ff5a635fd1c9c9e803f46795b1bfb3d17535
While working on T270009, I noticed that <style> and <link> nodes
are treated differently, which seemed weird. Rewrite this again,
hopefully this is the last time.
The changed test cases also involve <area> and <input> nodes,
and the new results make more sense to me.
Bug: T264116
Change-Id: I3af90c84768a4b3dc53446927f4dba6f72175a2f
