parameter & operation extensions display #3868
Conversation
|
@thompsongl thanks for the PR. I'll leave it to @shockey to comment about the code itself. Running this with a definition that has an extension in a parameter - am I supposed to see anything? Could be completely blind... |
|
@webron Not blind. I had an uncommitted change hanging out 😳 |
|
I think for an initial version, the styling is ok. Not a lot of magic that can be done with it. However, I think rendering the extensions should be optional and by default should be false. |
|
I can make that happen. Optional by way of configuration parameters or another method? |
|
Yeah, a configuration parameter. And yeah, would be great if that would apply to model extensions as well. Thanks for the help. |
|
@thompsongl, I just merged #3875 😄 |
|
Updated: Uses configuration param to display extensions |
|
@shockey, anything else you'd like to see as part of this changeset? |
|
@thompsongl, all good here - hoping to get this reviewed and merged Monday 😄 |
| @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ export default class ArrayModel extends Component { | |||
| static propTypes = { | |||
| schema: PropTypes.object.isRequired, | |||
| getComponent: PropTypes.func.isRequired, | |||
| getConfigs: PropTypes.func.isRequired, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not a huge fan of the getConfigs handaround - would prefer to see a container component mapping from the configs to props for children.
Fixes #3052 by adding components to display Parameter and Operation extensions (
x-values)Presentational components for
x-value displays are small and explicit intentionally. These changes allow for baseline rendering while giving easy access to override/wrap each extension component granularly. For instance, we plan on wrapping operation extensions to display extra information about our security-related values.Considerations: