Some details:
* The config is not optional in these cases.
* This patch continues to remove some comments that don't add
any information but just repeat what the code already says.
Change-Id: I5c27cd01ad80709bb583256821d65c6b65b74b05
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
It's good practice to make transparent elements transparent
for mouse clicks as well, i.e. make it possible to select text
behind the fade effect.
Bug: T283943
Bug: T286235
Change-Id: Ib5022a74c70e4b7cb5e2a0faad20bd9abcc0da36
Introduced in 2 separate patches by the same author. This
patch removes the line that was introduced last.
Change-Id: I77575f7afe0f9276c7b54ee44d828e7ccb87c978
These methods are special in so far that they create *minimal*
wikitext where optional whitespace is not preserved. I tried
to rename the methods to reflect this, but could not find a
caller. What's used instead are the .serialize() methods.
Bug: T284895
Change-Id: Iedaa5b7efa9675151cc0553854d8aef3f9a46cbb
If a known parameter is present using one of it's aliases, then
only the aliased name should be shown to the user. This patch,
therefore, resolves the issue of the same parameter being added
to the sidebar twice.
When adding a parameter that is aliased, it will receive the same
position as the non-aliased parameter it is replacing.
Bug: T274545
Change-Id: If4e58c941fd0f0e690d3603935f5a5d3f9938163
It's allowed in values, but not in parameter names. The moment
a parameter name contains an `=` the parameter name will be cut
off at this point, and what's behind the `=` will become part
of the value.
You can test this on any live wiki. Open VisualEditor. Edit any
template. Add a parameter with a name like `a=` and some value.
Switch to wikitext mode and back. Edit the template. The `=` is
now part of the value.
Bug: T98065
Change-Id: I5e00e8fac987471243605816b041d3638927ac3b
When what you type is a partial match, you can't add it as an
unknown parameter, even if that would be the correct action. The
reason for this unexpected edge-case is a mistake in the code
where a variable called "exactMatch" is set when a *partial*
"nameMatch" was found.
Bug: T285940
Change-Id: I6d12e2d7251a19d7d5f8be544c3c32a3ac14fcf0
The so called "spec" class keeps track of parameters that have
been used before, no matter if documented via TemplateData or
not. Removed parameters are still "known" (i.e. have been seen
before).
This feature allows to easily find previously used parameters
names when an undocumented parameter was removed and the user
tries to add it again.
Bug: T285483
Change-Id: Ia1555eea87cd99e7a3f386f4279ec5a80fb98a79
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
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
