* 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
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
We've recently decided that we want to "extend" comments until
the end of the paragraph (e36dc8e78a,
d0ae6c4e44).
However, we still had this special case that did the opposite: it
ensured that if a comment ended in the middle of a text node, the
comment would not be extended to the end of the node. Remove it.
Note the change in the test file signatures-funny-formattedreply.html,
which actually covered this case specifically.
Change-Id: Id1384bb0c6e1a5f0c70f55efcb4caa240f230f07
The end marker is skipped forward until an open or close
block tag is reached. In tree traversal terms this means
moving either to the next sibling, or the parent (to skip
over close tags).
Bug: T256033
Change-Id: Iaa2c588698790d576ac4f9ecc126f58a082ef6b3
The general rule is that comments start after their preceding
thread item, but when that is a heading we should skip past
the entire <h[1-6]> node to avoid making section edit links
part of the first comment.
Bug: T267988
Change-Id: Ia7f1b27e0a69a9aab7c7da743bf8549479304096
Use the same logic for marking ranges in the document, and ensure
that the heading range does not include section edit links or
section numberings.
Change-Id: I782caafc34fee2a822b0a17b24dd6b9528202eca
We avoided fixing these because it causes changes in just about all of
the test data, which is annoying when reviewing or blaming changes.
But the previous several commits also caused changes in just about all
of the test data, so we might as well do this too.
Change-Id: I83b64d83b6f12c04dc06c0cadff7cdd89417e137
To avoid old threads re-appearing on popular pages when someone
uses a vague title (e.g. dozens of threads titled "question" on
[[Wikipedia:Help desk]]: https://w.wiki/fbN), include the oldest
timestamp in the thread (i.e. date the thread was started) in the
heading ID.
Bug: T264478
Change-Id: If918bfd5e025248923d1939bc86916697ead95a0
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
Our threads now also contain all replies to their sub-threads.
This is similar to how sections work in MediaWiki, where the parent
section also contains the content of all the lower-level sections.
We're going to need this for notifications about replies in a thread.
Bug: T264478
Change-Id: I241fc58e2088a7555942824b0f184ed21e3a8b6f
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
The output of CommentFormatter::addReplyLinks() and consequently
ThreadItem::jsonSerialize() can end up in the HTTP cache (Varnish) on
Wikimedia wikis. We need to consider that when changing that code.
Introduce a concept of legacy ID (generated by the older algorithm
after it changes), add some placeholder code that will generate them
in the future, and update some code to find comments by either normal
or legacy IDs.
Add dire comments in a bunch of places (as if that ever helps).
Bug: T264478
Change-Id: I4368f366800ab21b8b184b09378037614fdecd33
"This modifies the original objects…" – I feel like this is obvious
now, but maybe it wasn't so obvious when this code was structured
differently before a2431fe006. Also,
it refers to a variable that doesn't exist.
"FIXME this will clone the reply…" – No, actually, it will not.
It would if replies were associative arrays, but they are objects,
and have always been, ever since the PHP parser was merged in
7b7a2cd69c. Maybe they were arrays
once in Roan's mind before he pushed that for review.
Change-Id: I1348e111699fdbde99cd1f9ef45d8f465f7391b0
When a timestamp directly followed a `<div>…</div>` tag (or perhaps
some other wrapper containing lots of content), we would detect the
username from the earliest links in the wrapper (furthest from the
timestamp), rather than the latest links (closest to the timestamp).
Bug: T262573
Change-Id: Id16449a86a731b13dc79846bb30ecf6554e26f1d
The wikitext parser outputs `<p><br></p>` for empty paragraphs, so we
need to ignore `<br>` tags when searching for an "interesting" node
that marks the beginning of a comment. Otherwise the empty paragraphs
mess up the detection of indentation levels.
Bug: T264116
Change-Id: I84a97ab577baa7336b78935ccdc48041ecfc231a
* Export parser data (date format, digits, timezone names, and
messages for weekday/month names) converted to language variants
* Update the parsers to try matching using every variant, in case
the page is displayed in non-default variant (and to avoid
problems with incomplete variant conversion)
Bug: T259818
Change-Id: I04d73992cd31ce06fa79f87df0c0a53d7efc3c58
PHP was counting UTF-8 bytes, JS was counting UTF-16 bytes.
Both should have been counting codepoints (although it doesn't
really matter as long as they both count the same things).
I noticed the issue after adding some tests using the Cyrillic
script, when one case had different results in PHP and JS:
Id25b537fecd789640c209ff7f30e777455a3aece.
Change-Id: Ic31240678f71ba48e6ec202126bf490cea12bb66
Move the code so that we check for "?title=" query parameter first,
because we don't handle this right in the other code path.
Use parse_url() instead of wfParseUrl() because the latter doesn't
accept relative URLs, and we don't care about the other differences.
Bug: T261711
Depends-On: I4da952876e1c3d1a41d06b51f7e26015ff5e34d7
Change-Id: I70fac2b41befd782b0a47a4f726ae748dc0f775d
The PHP code incorrectly assumed that the digits are single-byte in
UTF-8, which is never the case (except for 0-9).
The JS code worked correctly because it uses UTF-16 strings, so the
bug would only affect non-BMP digits there. This was noted in a TODO
comment, but we overlooked it when reimplementing in PHP.
Instead of a string of 10 characters, use an array of 10
single-character strings.
Bug: T261706
Change-Id: Ic5421382474c88f003424799c53ff473d99cce92
When a comment ended before the end of a paragraph, the next
comment would begin right there in the middle of the paragraph.
This could result in the detected indentation level of that
comment being incorrect, and replies being inserted in wrong
places, as seen in the 'signatures-funny' test case.
The code moved to the parser was previously repeated twice in
addListItem() and addReplyLink(), which should have been a hint
that something isn't quite right.
Also, fix the code guarding against overlapping signatures,
now that signatures may not be at the end of a comment.
Bug: T260855
Change-Id: Ic26a87642f8a15d5de2f7073d4d8176b299c7f94
Previously, parser would output offsets that don't exist in their
containers, because we were pretending that entities are parts of
their neighboring text nodes.
Turns out it's much easier to do it right when going backwards.
Change-Id: I9bccca2d403f1a976ae517449989170cdd99721e
When adding a reply, we take a node at the end of the previous comment,
compare that comment's indentation level to the expected indentation level
of the reply, and add (or remove) that number of wrapper lists.
The existing code did not consider that comments may have lists within
them, and so the indentation of that node may not match the indentation
of the comment.
Bug: T252702
Change-Id: Icc5ff19783d2b213bff99f283cb0599a8b5c1ab4
* Pass rootNode to the constructor
* Rename getters to match CommentItem/HeadingItem/ThreadItem
value classes.
* Always build the thread tree so CommentItem's always have
and ID and replies/parent.
Change-Id: I508be9534de59016ff806e3d84edcbb1c76cb0c6
