For example, the Citoid extension adds a "change reference type"
button which should be visible when editing a citation template.
TODO: Decide whether we want to hide the "hide options" button in
this case. This should be handled in a separate patch and possibly
in a follow-up phase, it requires deeper changes to the logic.
Bug: T294351
Change-Id: I1c6c322fe48044d7e726bf20ba7cd2eda422cd8b
I6909b3f0b2c153b7ee9995441e995ffa793eab40 was rebased, but
I0226ca7d39e04a69617c0d8a5d3c293cfc9e0709 was merged in the meantime.
Bug: T293202
Change-Id: I3cfec9ebc135eaf998a0982f458cfe75bfb2f01c
This is a more radical change, compared to the previous patch.
I will post more detailled explanations as comments on Gerrit.
Change-Id: I6909b3f0b2c153b7ee9995441e995ffa793eab40
Some cleanup to improve readability and reduce the amount of code.
Relevant bits:
* One method name was wrong. It can actually return parameter ids,
not only top-level part ids.
* I got rid of some fail-safe checks that are never needed or moved
them to a more central place.
Change-Id: I08f2ad7bc7d3f985d6189dff170dda554f3d37c2
This patch fixes two issues:
* The bottom corner of the new sidebar was never correct because of
a `padding: 2px` that was introduced later, but never compensated
for.
* The moment the toolbar is shown it's not a single-template dialog
any more. This implies minor style changes.
Bug: T290262
Bug: T292727
Change-Id: I08da73880c469085994ee4beb3fcdd973f80ae11
I moved some code around and found that quite a lot of code wants to
know:
* Is the length of this transclusion exactly 1?
* I need that 1st part.
There is more that can potentially moved from the dialog to the model.
But I don't want to make this patch to big.
Bug: T292371
Change-Id: Ia94ed0450d04dd97c4c41f5bf7c266f9a534e821
This includes some moving of code. These helper functions seem to make
more sense in the TemplateDialog class.
Bug: T292371
Change-Id: I004405bab60a569b084f9083fefa41f44f9a5561
I hope this code is a little cleaner. This patch doesn't change how
the dialog behaves.
Bug: T292210
Change-Id: I237812b3404437948eb76d8b36dcca2a4c688d6d
This method does not only select a "part", i.e. a top-level item like
a template. It also selects sub-items like template parameters. The
new name reflects this better.
Change-Id: I51a8ddbd05b283248afba5a623cc52da7b2434f5
Reasserts scroll and highlighting when toggling the sidebar, in the
case that the other panel is hidden (narrow-view mode).
FIXME: Doesn't reassert focus because the page.focus() and
bookletLayout.focus() methods don't seem to work, maybe the bug is
especially prominent when the item to focus was already marked
active.
FIXME: Stopped working for right-to-left sync on wikitext elements.
This is a less common use case and can be addressed in follow-up.
Bug: T290975
Change-Id: I94f5709e810c63ee5fd7729a192ac7b92686b88f
AddPart in the resetDialog also triggers replace part
so this call could be removed there.
Bug: T291365
Change-Id: Id6c0f5bf3aaece45da37ffab75a4d99c113944f6
This code was introduced in I8fafee6. I can't tell any more what
the "bug" mentioned in the commit message was. Let's get rid of the
duplicate code path, see if we run into regressions and deal with
them one by one. That's much easier to handle than keeping this
confusing code path around.
Note this "focusin" event handler was actually re-implementing
parts of the upstream BookletLayout, namely
OO.ui.BookletLayout.onStackLayoutFocus().
Bug: T289043
Bug: T291381
Change-Id: Ib386ae6efec08465122f0e8ee81cd6dc9a2d337a
We broke something with the change I166b971. When we renamed that
method it started to override (and therefor disable) the method
with the same name from the base class.
I decided to move all code in the subclass for the moment. It might
be misplaced there (note how almost all code related to the new
sidebar is in the base class). But this is cleanup work for later.
Bug: T289043
Bug: T291151
Change-Id: Id255585e78967eee0f72c27727cd23211674923c
It was called like this because the event is literally called "set".
But it doesn't explain _what_ is set.
The new name .onBookletLayoutSetPage() already appears somewhere
else in the codebase.
Change-Id: I166b971c08f5d0fae97fc9d6244117a680f84b7c
The OO.ui.OutlineOptionWidget class does have an .isRemovable()
state. This is how OO.ui.OutlineControlsWidget decides if the
remove button can be used.
It appears like ve.ui.MWParameterPage forgot to mark required
parameters as not removable.
This makes some oddly specific code in ve.ui.MWTransclusionDialog
obsolete. Note how this class does not contain any other code
about "required" or other flags specific to parameters.
Note that one aspect of this patch will be visible in the old
sidebar: The trashcan will be visible on required parameters, but
disabled. It was hidden before. However, this actually improves
the UX. Hiding the trashcan made the up/down buttons jump around.
This makes it unnecessary hard to hit them. It also causes visual
distraction when navigating the list of parameters.
Let's stick to the upstream OOUI behavior.
The remove button still disappears when the only element in the
dialog is the template search widget. This is clearly an
entirely different state. (Don't ask why the up/down buttons are
not hidden. It was like this before.)
Bug: T289039
Change-Id: If78881e503f19f497f1993da4e5b9b09ee538307
It's impossible to use the delete button from the
OO.ui.OutlineControlsWidget to delete a parameter when the new
sidebar is active.
This partly fixes one of the issues mentioned in I97d77f4. The
delete button might stil become active for a moment (not fixed
yet), but doesn't stay active forever any more with this fix
in place.
Apparently this also makes another workaround obsolete.
Change-Id: I0bca310772c26149170af23ff8e5505c3ce4adf4
Pure cleanup, doesn't change behavior.
Change If8da5ae85dff63c34 included in OOUI v0.42.0 tracks invisible
controls, so it's no longer necessary to maintain persistent class
variables pointing to the buttons.
Also simplify repeated logic to make it clearly exclusive.
Bug: T290554
Change-Id: If9b6404d7061999540515645fa8e50b9a21f5a21
Previously, when the tranclusion dialog was being resized, there was
a specific width at which both the sidebar was collapsed and the dialog
was downsized from "larger/large" to "medium". This resulted in the
dialog switching from fullscreen to floating, since the dialog's width
breakpoint for "medium" doesn't match our width breakpoint for mobile.
If the user continued to downsize past this breakpoint, then the dialog
would eventually switch back to fullscreen resulting in this weird
behavior.
A simple way to prevent this is to avoid changing the dialog's size
at all. Since we don't support collapsing the new sidebar (unless
already in fullscreen), we can just leave the dialog at the
"larger/large" size.
Bug: T274554
Change-Id: I5460cdfb1a7ed73fe7957745ba37055c5f66dce1
This comes with a few significant changes:
* A whole bunch of places in the code that focus and highlight
an element in the old sidebar consider the new sidebar now.
* Same when e.g. the toolbar at the bottom needs to know which
part is selected. This is read from the new sidebar now.
* To make this possible I had to merge the small helper class
we introduced in I7bc73cc back into the dialog.
It's helpful to understand how the event flow works:
* You click a template name. This does nothing (does not select
the element). It only triggers an event.
* The event is catched by the outer container that manages
all parts. From there all elements are unselected, and one
selected. This call is internal and should not trigger
another event.
Bug: T285323
Bug: T288827
Bug: T289043
Change-Id: I4a2d2b83cf2691423d4b0e6f4487228fa3c7b56d
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
