* We don't need it anywhere in JS, since we're not sending that HTML
to Parsoid.
* We only need it on the nodes directly containing our reply lines in
PHP, not all over the place.
Change-Id: I0a04388225f32654dda2f599442cd27a303b5d0a
Comment boundaries are stored as a DOM parent node plus a child index.
Because of that, inserting anything into the DOM before a comment –
such as another comment's start/end markers – would cause us to insert
subsequent comments' markers into the wrong places.
This issue didn't affect many pages, because usually any parent node
would have just one comment in it. Only pages with comment boundaries
outside of any wrappers (directly inside the root node) were broken.
Just process the list in reverse to fix this.
Bug: T298096
Change-Id: Iccffc36b71e9fcf3d72c4db2b9459d39042f7a2d
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
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
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
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
Sequential numbers aren't great because they change when an earlier
comment is archived. Parent comment/heading IDs should change less
often.
This also makes much more sense for disambiguating subsections,
e.g. a dozen identical ===Votes=== sections for a dozen proposals.
Bug: T264478
Change-Id: I466454984fd919ebef35f2b37ddb5d86dc842996
Previously, only comments could have IDs, because we only needed IDs
for replying. But we might also use them for notifications soon.
Bug: T264478
Change-Id: I1bcad02bf17ab54bc5028a959543c10f0430836b
When there is a wrapper element whose range matches the range of
a comment, any replies will now be added outside of that wrapper,
instead of directly after the comment (inside the wrapper).
Bug: T250126
Change-Id: I6b42c4db019ae998e91eebd324f9cbd2aa791b4f
