Add hooks to modify theme.json structure #27722
Closed
Conversation
This file contains 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
oandregal
added
[Status] In Progress
|
Size Change: +11 B (0%) Total Size: 1.28 MB
ℹ️ View Unchanged
|
| if ( isset( $context['styles'] ) ) { | ||
| $this->process_key( 'color', $context['styles'], self::SCHEMA['styles'] ); | ||
| $this->process_key( 'typography', $context['styles'], self::SCHEMA['styles'] ); | ||
| $this->process_key( 'color', $context['styles'], $schema['styles'] ); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hi @nosolosw,
With this PR we will be able to change the schema but this PR does not allow us to make the new properties output/do anything. When we add a new property to the schema, or a new preset how are we going to output the new styles?
E.g: after we move lib/class-wp-theme-json.php to the core if we want to add more functionalities to theme.json what is the strategy we should follow?
I guess a possibility would be to in plugin keeep lib/class-wp-theme-json.php and ignore/unregister the one shipped in the core?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey, while this is proof of concept it already works in the front-end and post editor. The remaining task would be to be able to make it work in the site editor, which seems a matter of being able to extend __EXPERIMENTAL_STYLE_PROPERTY client-side. What other blockers do you anticipate to make this work?
Also note that I don't think we should add hooks yet, as we're still consolidating the theme.json shape #27295 #28110
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm also happy to hear/discuss what use cases we anticipate to have to see if we may need a different approach. I've listed the ones I can think of at #27504
There was a problem hiding this comment.
At first sight, it seems if we also add a filter to presets we cover the extensibility needs of class-wp-theme-json.php.
But to allow the Gutenberg plugin to continue to evolve and not need to standardize on an API/fitlers right after including theme.json into the core, we also have the opportunity of on the plugin simply unregistering what core is doing and making core class-wp-theme-json.php unused and simply use class-wp-theme-json.php from the plugin. Then updating core would be a matter of updating class-wp-theme-json.php to match the plugin. Similarly to what happens on server-side render blocks.
This was referenced Jan 12, 2021
|
We're changing theme.json format as per #29891 so this is going to need change. Closing it for now. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Implements part of #27504
Now that we're looking into merging the "global styles" mechanism into WordPress core, we need a way to iterate on the theme.json structure from the Gutenberg plugin. The main use case is to add new style properties, although removing existing ones should also be considered.
TODO:
__EXPERIMENTAL_STYLE_PROPERTY, so it works in the site editor.fontSize) matches. Currently, it validates the section instead (typography). This can perhaps be a follow-up, as it something pre-existing.Test