-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 622
XWIKI-24144: Clarify original and target pages during replace dialog #5369
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
Sereza7
wants to merge
2
commits into
xwiki:master
Choose a base branch
from
Sereza7:XWIKI-24144
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+10
−7
Open
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If not too much work, I'd be curious to see the difference between
I'm also interested in what it looks like on hover. I think someone mentioned a possibly odd look with the underline spanning below the icon.
The rest of the PR looks ok, thanks for your work :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Printing
$document.plainTitlewithout XML-escaping introduces an XSS vulnerability. This needs to be fixed (escaped).There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@manuelleduc
Here are screenshots of the three options in the same order, with the mouse hovering on one of the two links:



I decided to add the nbsp in 6ff4ece because I believe it's what we do in most places and it looks a bit better. This looks a bit odd when hovered but IMO it's alright.
The only strong opinion I have on this is that I think it makes sense to make the icon clickable so we should include it in the link.
Just to be sure, I checked with Silk and IMO things look okay here too:

I think this was a comment made about the underlining under "nothing" between the icon and the text. I remember a comment was done when we changed it in the notification dropdown:

This is an argument against adding a NBSP here, but in my opinion it's not strong enough to enforce the choice.
It's a small layout detail, but it could be something to include in the UX guidelines to share with Cristal @tkrieck has proposed on the forum. Something like:
When using an icon with its explaining text, separate them with a non breaking space.(vocab is probably too implementation centered)or
When using an icon with its explaining text, do not separate them with any character.@michitux
Good find! Sorry for missing this one. I fixed it in 6ff4ece 👍