Add optional link to video page for video blocks

[owi92]

closes #854

This adds an optional link to video blocks which links directly to the video page of that block.
Right now it is a link button but I wouldn't mind if this were just a link (just text + icon without the background and outline).

[dagraf]

The momentarily implemented solution is quite confusing. Users might ask themselves what this "Video page" might be and what the option "Show link" is actually doing.

Suggestion:

• Rename option to: "Show sharing option"
• If activated: Offer a button "Share" with similar behaviour to the "Share" button on video pages.
• Clicking on this button "Share": A modal gets opened offering a link that can get copy-pasted and it is explained that this is a direct link to the video without the integration into the current page.

[owi92]

Thank you for your feedback.
To be honest, I dont really understand how the solution presented here is confusing (apart from the wording on the checkbox, which should indeed clarify that it will show a link to the video page). I don't mind your new suggestion, but reading your and @oas777's comments on #854 gave me the impression that both of you agreed with @LukasKalbertodt's suggestion to "include a small link below the video saying "go to video page ->", with the link doing basically the same as clicking a video inside series blocks.

Edit: I have updated the wording and changed the link from a "direct link" to one that links to the video "in context" (the same link that is shown in the regular share menu - I think that was one of the issues you mentioned in our meeting? Though in the above comment you suggest using a direct link, so I'm not sure on that). Maybe that makes this less confusing. I am still open for your suggestion but I would like to wait for Lukas' and Olaf's opinions on this.

[oas777]

After revisiting #854, I'm with Ole on this one (and I wasn't fully aware what I was looking at during our meeting, apologies) who did what the ticket asked for. The idea of "sharing" wasn't part of that - and can happen on the "video page". When I'm embedding a video on a webpage, I don't necessarily have sharing in mind, the player usually does offer that option (not Paella, I just realize).

So if sharing is on your mind regardless, David, the link to the "video page" should be replaced by the "Share" symbol (activated by the user with a "Allow sharing" click when embedding the video).

[dagraf]

After reviewing @owi92's changes:

• I appreciate that you have changed the link to "video in context". I think, this makes it less confusing. Therefore, forget about the suggestion I made in my last comment.
• What do you think about changing the wording of the option (to "Show button 'To video page'") and button (to "To video page"). Reason: That's what this option does, it offers a button that sends me to the video page when I click on it - and it does not show the link.

[oas777]

David, I think you're overthinking this one... again. Your suggestion is like renaming the "Home" button to "Take me to the homepage please". I'm fine with the current solution.

[dagraf]

That's why I asked for your opinions. I can live with the naming of the button. My concern is, that the option I check does not exactly what it says. It does not "show me the link to the video page", it shows a button which takes me to the video page when clicking on it. I would therefore still suggest to rename the option to "Show button 'To video page'".

[owi92]

I'm fine with David's naming suggestion and changed the wording accordingly. Please note that it will be a while until this gets deployed since we are dealing with some server issues at the moment (that's why the check below is failing).

[oas777]

Well, now I know where you're standing, Ole...

[LukasKalbertodt]

I think the label "Go to video page" is fine. Not using the direct link, but the "in page link" is a good call as well, IMO.

Design wise, I'm not super satisfied. What do you all think about aligning it to the right of the video:

Or even removing the button look and just going with a normal link?

(I didn't put much thought into how the link looks, I'm sure this can still be improved)

Not using a button would have the advantage of not disrupting the page flow as much. (Imagine lots of text on a page with the occasional video in between.) It's still something users are able to find, but if this link is too intrusive, then I fear many will disable it because it "makes the page look ugly".

[LukasKalbertodt]

Nice work, especially working on the backend alone! I only have some rather minor things, I think.

[dagraf]

Or even removing the button look and just going with a normal link?

I'm in favor of this solution (right align and going with a normal link).

[oas777]

I love to be that guy, so if you're saying it's a "normal link", why the arrow? Other (normal) links are blue and underlined, no arrows.

[oas777]

PS: "Click here to go to the video page and in case this isn't clear there's an additional arrow you can click on."

[LukasKalbertodt]

Good changes, just three tiny things.

[LukasKalbertodt]

@oas777 Oh, somehow I missed your comments until now. Fair point, but I don't personally mind the arrow. I think it works better with the arrow than without.

[oas777]

Good morning! "it works better with the arrow than without" - what does that mean? Is it more reliable? Faster? Jokes aside, this is about design and coherence, so I don't think the arrow should be there, unless we're using it somewhere else already.

[LukasKalbertodt]

Ja moin! By "works better" I just meant: looks better and immediately suggests what it does. I feel like the right-arrow (implying a rightwards motion) is very intuitive. I also don't think it breaks coherence, I don't find it very disruptive. And yes, we indeed use it elsewhere already:

But ok, here a comparison for reference:

Again, I'm in favor of keeping the arrow.

[dagraf]

I am also in favor of keeping the arrow.

[LukasKalbertodt]

In interest of getting PRs merged, I will merge this now. If you, Olaf, are still strongly against the arrow, it can still be removed later.

[oas777]

That's two in favor and I know where Ole stands (#926 (comment)), so go ahead and keep ignoring me...

[oas777]

PS: It actually looks better with the arrow, true.