This is really only about the methods name, but doesn't change
any behavior.
I realized we work with several different definitions of what
"empty" means. There are at least two significant definitions:
1. When a parameter's value is the empty string or identical
to the default value, the behavior of the template is the same.
It will use the default value just as if the user entered it.
The auto-value is a meaningful value in this scenario and can't
be considered equal to the empty string.
2. The context here is when the user presses the back button.
This will destroy all user input. But an auto-value is not user
input. It will appear again when the user realizes they made a
mistake. Nothing is lost.
Personally, I would not use the word "empty" to describe this
concept. Things like "containsUserProvidedValue",
"isCustomValue", "isMeaningfulValue", … come to mind. These are
all still a big vague. A "user provided" value can be identical
to the default or auto-value. "Custom" how? I went for
"containsValuableData" for now.
Bug: T274551
Change-Id: I2912a35556795c867a6b2396cbad291e947f0ed6
I came up with a new event to do this. This event is triggered
individually for each parameter. An alternative is a single
event that gets a list of visible parameters. Is this better?
What do you think?
Bug: T288202
Change-Id: Ia44da16917c28171a01aef0f1c613dcd5d3266ba
This is – for now – intentionally done in a way that can be
undone. This will still be helpful for debugging for a while.
But we need to get rid of the duplication to be able to make
this new functionality visible on the beta cluster.
Actual removal will hapen the moment we actually remove the
old toolbar. There are already tickets for this.
Bug: T286765
Change-Id: I842c3c39a55a273af20643fa8a602d2e57fb6b8c
Note that this patch alone probably does not make that much
sense. The code executed is pretty much the same. The only
difference is that the empty (!) …ContainerWidget is kept
and re-filled with what might be a completely different
template.
This is not much of a difference to before when the
container was recreated.
This change will make more sense when the container has to
manage more state, e.g. focus states. This state will
survive then.
Change-Id: Ic336d10a595e3e222741a3dc57c1d54639166b7a
Notably:
* Don't require the model in the new sidebar via dependency
injection, but connect the event handlers later. This is
relevant because we currently create the new sidebar in the
wrong spot. Removing the hard dependency allows us to split
the code and utilize initialize() and getSetupProcess()
correctly. This will be done in a following patch.
* The change event now includes the new position. This makes
it very easy to add this missing feature to the new sidebar.
Also:
* Stop triggering change events when nothing changed. These
events are expensive. They bubble all the way up to the
TransclusionModel, and to all linked
onTransclusionModelChange() handlers.
* Update event documentation to make this more visible.
Bug: T274544
Change-Id: Iafe29f18a6fed14d9c3124c9756aa840886afbbc
Clicks on the left side now focus elements on the right
side.
This patch also simplifies the …ContainerWidget constructor.
The config parameter should only be used for "OOUI things"
that are needed by subclasses and mixins. But the parameters
we have here are not "UI things".
Passing them as config passes them to classes where we don't
know what they do with it. What probably happens is that
some class keeps a reference to the entire config object,
which doesn't have a benefit and possibly blocks garbage
collection.
Bug: T274544
Change-Id: I0c0e4a1ba59dcb43141338ffe939c9c6783e000d
Before, the new sidebar was hacked in a place where it confused
the BookletLayout logic. This became visible when using the
up/down buttons to move elements in the sidebar.
This new container wraps the new and the old sidebar. It also
uses a temporary color to make it easier to see where one ends
and the other starts.
Bug: T274544
Change-Id: I4e5b40b1d1556886fc85cff9e926a02e4888f032
For example, checking if a parameter is required works just fine
for unknown parameters. They are never required. Since I16708b0
we don't need to guard the spec related methods any more.
Change-Id: Id90e4cb810dc9faca3b26f122a534f276ee31709
I rearranged this piece of code like a dozen times before I
finally understood what it actually does. This should be much
more obvious now.
The idea is:
* If no edit was made the button is always disabled.
* You can save pretty much everything, except when the
transclusion still starts with a placeholder.
* You can also click the done button when the dialog is empty.
This feels a bit odd, but was like this before. I think this
codepath is unreachable. But it probably doesn't hurt to
keep it.
Bug: T284895
Change-Id: Ic483201b64fd64f414c5b1ec4c44198b8eadb9f2
These tags don't do much, if anything. But they provide a hint
in which scope a method might be used.
Bug: T284895
Change-Id: I0b4bdd416ee89d26961c4ded4d8bbace8c57da76
This reverts commit 950a5300dc.
Reason for revert: This broke several workflows. The reason is
that MWParameterPlaceholderPage & MWParameterSearchWidget both
hold references to the MWTemplateModel. This model is not
always the same. The dialog might be the same when a template
is edited multiple times. But the model might be a new one.
From this point on the MWParameterSearchWidget pulls data from
an outdated model.
Bug: T284636
Bug: T285571
Change-Id: I7b9ea8cab8f17705ec8020f07e3732da6ba0e73c
This does not revert commit 950a5300 but applies the most
minimal hotfix I could come up with.
The reason for the breakage is that MWParameterPlaceholderPage
& MWParameterSearchWidget both hold references to the
MWTemplateModel. This model is not always the same. The dialog
might be the same when a template is edited multiple times.
But the model might be a new one. From this point on the
MWParameterSearchWidget pulls data from an outdated model.
This extra check compares this model reference and creates a
new widget when it changed.
Bug: T284636
Bug: T285571
Change-Id: Ib3eca52bbff90ffbf56a257e3984adcbe02b310b
There is a codepath where `modelPromise` is undefined and
calling `modelPromise.then()` fails. This codepath implies
that the dialog is empty and there is nothing to update. We
can just close the dialog then.
I found this while debugging the actions in this dialog.
This happens when the dialog is empty (except for a
placeholder) but you submit it anyway. This is typically
not possible as the button is supposed to be disabled.
Still I think it's a good idea to make this code less
fragile.
The relevant code was introduced in Ibc2fc66 (2016).
Change-Id: Ia6b723548456c211b944a2320949bfc23b0afa16
This makes the code more readable and easier to reason about.
The ESLint rule responsible for this code style was removed
just recently.
Notes:
* I focus on classes that are relevant for what the WMDE team
does right now.
* I merge multiple `var` keywords only when the variables are
strongly connected.
* Caching the length in a for loop makes the code hard to
read, but not really faster when it's a trivial property
access anyway.
Bug: T284895
Change-Id: I621fed61d894a83dc95f58129bbe679d82b0f5f5
This reverts parts of I678bb24.
Brief history of this code:
2014: The dialog was designed to dynamically change the title.
There was never a tooltip.
2016: A change in OOjs changed the behavior in VE. Now the initial
title shows up as a tooltip. It never updates because VE
does not know about this. The tooltip does not match the
visible title.
2021: We revert to the behavior from 2014. We achieve this by
bypassing the codepath that creates the tooltip. This is why
….title.setLabel() is used instead of ….static.title.
Bug: T276568
Change-Id: I346a904881c3a63186d6a80afdaf717688bab42a
The tooltip is useful for languages where the dialog title might get
truncated. This patch makes sure the tooltip is always the same as
the visible label.
Bug: T276568
Change-Id: I678bb243bb5ac6d1c516ee4e146f2db9ffd5afcf
This not really just a checkbox widget anymore it inherits from
FieldLayout and became something more in that direction.
Let's use a mixture of these things to make it a bit clearer.
See also comment in Ie81b84be288553343017c4aaf8691c4e266995f5
Change-Id: Iff1746a8e5e94b56eb6c27465405aaf6b74c2310
Most notably:
* Introduce variable names that explain much better what's
going on.
* Reduce nesting.
Bug: T284895
Change-Id: I793677d8107abb6354f9e19d79c4879a41c4bd93
This action was removed via Ib744b89 in 2019, see
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/c/mediawiki/extensions/VisualEditor/+/491537/4/modules/ve-mw/ui/dialogs/ve.ui.MWTemplateDialog.js
Note the messages that are removed in this patch:
* …-action-insert was used for the "insert" action.
* …-action-apply was used for an "apply" action.
* …-action-cancel doesn't mention an action. Internally,
the cancel action is "".
Since Ibd740ad the actions are registered in the
FragmentDialog superclass, see
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/c/VisualEditor/VisualEditor/+/491536/2/src/ui/dialogs/ve.ui.FragmentDialog.js
Note the messages. Cancel is unchanged. …-action-insert and
…-action-apply are still there, but both linked to the same
"done" action. The "apply" and "insert" actions are gone.
I.e. they are merged into a single "done" action, represented
by a single button that changes the label from "Insert" to
"Apply changes" when needed.
On top of that,
MWTransclusionDialog.updateActionSet() replaces "Apply
changes" with "Save".
Note: Other dialogs also mention an "insert" action. I didn't
look at these. These are not in the focus of our team's
current project.
Bug: T284895
Change-Id: I1d35ada3b5b2049ed20c2d940a1c065b704c978d
The "mode" button is the button that allows to expand and
collapse the dialog. It can't be collapsed when multiple
templates are edited. That's what these lines do,
disabling the button.
"Can expand" is not the correct question. It's always
possible to expand the dialog no matter what it contains.
Bug: T284895
Change-Id: I60f3060695c80bf5541ef2156be89b85a62bf91b
Introduces new widgets forming the backbone of the experimental
template dialog sidebar.
FIXME: `text-overflow: ellipsis` is not working yet, the container
styles need adjustment.
Bug: T274543
Change-Id: Ie81b84be288553343017c4aaf8691c4e266995f5
We can skip all the up and down message passing by persisting the
parameter placeholders for each template dialog. If the parameter
list is expanded then the placeholder is deleted, on being created
again it will still have state.
To test: create a transclusion with two templates, each having many
parameters. "Add more information" to add parameters, expand the
list by clicking "Show <num> more fields", then delete the parameter
placeholder using the trash cans. Try different permutations to fool
the cache or collide with another template.
This is preparation for other template sidebar dialog work.
Bug: T284636
Change-Id: I23bdd38b173114c2a9afafc7465c4beb92d25869
