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

Block adding Glossary Terms containing punctuation with error/warning #768

Closed
garrett-eclipse opened this Issue Jun 30, 2017 · 4 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@garrett-eclipse

garrett-eclipse commented Jun 30, 2017

Hello,

This issue stems from #762 where it was mentioned that punctuation is stripped when doing a term lookup, as such I'd suggest the Glossary block creation of those terms, and possibly add a way to mark invalid terms that already exist.

Thanks

@toolstack

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@toolstack

toolstack Jun 30, 2017

Contributor

I don't think it's worth going back to try and detect existing 'broken' glossary terms programatically, they don't break anything per say and if someone edits one it will give the error.

Contributor

toolstack commented Jun 30, 2017

I don't think it's worth going back to try and detect existing 'broken' glossary terms programatically, they don't break anything per say and if someone edits one it will give the error.

@garrett-eclipse

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@garrett-eclipse

garrett-eclipse Jun 30, 2017

Sounds good, you're right is probably more work than it's worth to test the existing. So just an error on submission would suffice

garrett-eclipse commented Jun 30, 2017

Sounds good, you're right is probably more work than it's worth to test the existing. So just an error on submission would suffice

@ocean90 ocean90 added the priority:low label Jul 1, 2017

@ocean90

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@ocean90

ocean90 Jul 1, 2017

Member

I don't think we should block them, why not removing such characters automatically? Sounds also like a rare case since we request a term and not a sentence.

Member

ocean90 commented Jul 1, 2017

I don't think we should block them, why not removing such characters automatically? Sounds also like a rare case since we request a term and not a sentence.

@toolstack

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@toolstack

toolstack Jul 1, 2017

Contributor

Agree it's a rare case, blocking seemed safer as you might get strange cases where simply removing them would not be good (typos for example).

The block and error makes sure it gets some attention, a simple replace might create unwanted entries.

Also, doing a bit of research seemed to show \b was very implementation dependent.

Contributor

toolstack commented Jul 1, 2017

Agree it's a rare case, blocking seemed safer as you might get strange cases where simply removing them would not be good (typos for example).

The block and error makes sure it gets some attention, a simple replace might create unwanted entries.

Also, doing a bit of research seemed to show \b was very implementation dependent.

@toolstack toolstack modified the milestones: 3.0, 2.4 Aug 15, 2017

@ocean90 ocean90 closed this in #770 Sep 26, 2017

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment