umb-confirmation directive: move trashcan into directive and address accessibility issues #8198
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
…ttons in a ng-if section
… delete old buttons and icons used to trigger it
# Conflicts: # src/Umbraco.Web.UI.Client/src/views/propertyeditors/listview/layouts.prevalues.html # src/Umbraco.Web.UI.Client/src/views/propertyeditors/multipletextbox/multipletextbox.html
|
Wonderful, thanks again @BatJan - this works great, cheers! 🍻 |
This was referenced Jul 30, 2020
|
Unfortunately this was a breaking change for people using the |
nul800sebastiaan
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 13, 2020
…address accessibility issues (#8198)" This reverts commit 1cd79d8. # Conflicts: # src/Umbraco.Web.UI.Client/src/views/components/umb-confirm-action.html # src/Umbraco.Web.UI.Client/src/views/propertyeditors/listview/layouts.prevalues.html # src/Umbraco.Web.UI.Client/src/views/propertyeditors/multipletextbox/multipletextbox.html
nul800sebastiaan
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 13, 2020
…address accessibility issues (#8198)" This reverts commit 1cd79d8. # Conflicts: # src/Umbraco.Web.UI.Client/src/views/components/umb-confirm-action.html # src/Umbraco.Web.UI.Client/src/views/propertyeditors/listview/layouts.prevalues.html # src/Umbraco.Web.UI.Client/src/views/propertyeditors/multipletextbox/multipletextbox.html (cherry picked from commit f9b49fc)
1 task
|
@BatJan @nul800sebastiaan okay, so I've updated this PR to be backwards compatible. |
nul800sebastiaan
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 22, 2020
…address accessibility issues (#8198)" This reverts commit 1cd79d8. # Conflicts: # src/Umbraco.Web.UI.Client/src/views/components/umb-confirm-action.html # src/Umbraco.Web.UI.Client/src/views/propertyeditors/listview/layouts.prevalues.html # src/Umbraco.Web.UI.Client/src/views/propertyeditors/multipletextbox/multipletextbox.html (cherry picked from commit f9b49fc) (cherry picked from commit 22a1423)
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.
Prerequisites
✔️ I have added steps to test this contribution in the description below
Description
While I did the PR for #8194 I afterwards noticed the pattern for using the directive was a bit weird/disconnected... Currently it relies on an outside button to trigger the "confirm" or "undo" icons... Which has then led to different patterns of implementing. Some places a
<button>has been used, some places a<i>and some places dictionary items have been added, some places not and then it hit me that the "trigger" should also be part of the directive making the usage easier and more consistent.I have done the following
I'm considering if perhaps the directive should be renamed to something else in order to maintain backwards compatibility since the changes I have made are breaking. I'm thinking that perhaps it would also be a good idea to consider the look and feel to be more in line with the backoffice in general so perhaps renaming the directive would be best?Thoughts @nul800sebastiaan and @nielslyngsoe ? 😃Nevermind this comment I figured out a solution that avoids breaking it.