While the term "canonical" is not wrong, I find it still
somewhat ambiguous.
1. "Canonical" could mean different things. E.g. is the order
of parameters as they appear in the article's wikitext the
"canonical" one? It's possible to argue like this, esp. if a
template doesn't have TemplateData documentation. In this case
the only order known is the one from the wikitext.
2. "Canonical" sounds like the parameters must be reordered.
But this should never happen. Not having dirty diffs is more
important than having the parameters in a specific order.
Bug: T285483
Change-Id: I23658d37fea50b727667677ac6a49066673b2135
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an outdated model.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MWParameterSearchWidget pulls data from an outdated model.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 reflects much better how this method is meant to behave.
Note I will continue to remove documentation that doesn't
explain anything in addition to what the code already says.
Bug: T285483
Change-Id: I81fa8a5d9d0752f3aeac4015c9a27b50e054d4df
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
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 will avoid that the search breaks in edge cases where symbols
are used.
Including a fallback for ES5 browsers. The fallback should cover
almost all cases. Worst case would be not adding the asterisk even
though it might be valid.
Bug: T284554
Change-Id: Ie4aee0b77492b7a73bc251a8723a206dbd641600
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
