add form builder test and add collapsible sub forms #161
Conversation
| # Subform: ext:formListingFormItem | ||
| ########################################################## | ||
| ext:formListingFormItem a form:SubForm; | ||
| sh:name "Listing"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this is a change from how the actual form builder organizes its forms. By putting the name at the form level, the controls are nicely wrapped around the title of the form. Otherwise the title (of the propertygroup as configured in the real form builder) appears below the controls and looks out of place.
| @@ -34,7 +55,7 @@ | |||
| </AuToolbar> | |||
| {{/if}} | |||
|
|
|||
| <div class="au-o-flow"> | |||
| <div class="au-o-flow {{if this.collapsed 'au-u-hidden'}}"> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
using au-u-hidden here because it seems that rendering it conditionally using #if or #unless breaks the children of a propertygroup
| ########################################################## | ||
| ext:formListingFormItem a form:SubForm; | ||
| sh:name "Listing"; | ||
| form:isCollapsible true; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's probably me but I thought that the predicate form:isCollapsible would define if it is possible to collapse but I see that it is used for the state of it?
When testing in the formbuilder dummy app I also can't see a difference when putting the predicate on false or true. When showing the value of the isCollapsible in the UI it shows the 1 and 0 when changing but nothing is collapsed or uncollapsed.
What I assume we wanted to achieve is that we could define if the collapse toggle is possible on the item + when collapsing is possible that we can add a start state for it?
If i' wrong than i'm wrong 😅
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey Jonas, you're absolutely right, thanks! I didn't check the value of the form:isCollapsible predicate and just assumed that if it existed, it meant that they wanted it collapsible. With the latest commit I now expect the value to be '1' which is how a boolean true seems to be handled in rdflib.
I also made the listings not collapsible by default.
You got it right that form:isCollapsible was meant to signify whether collapsing is possible, it's not about the state. I wasn't planning on adding a predicate to signify whether a form is collapsed or not by default. Do you think it's worth having? Would it be something like form:collapsedByDefault true; then?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The predicate now does what it's should be doing great! Thanks 🤩
That's a good one im not how it should be implemented.. In my head: if you have a listing with fields the fields in that listing would be collapsed on init but that's not something that you could specify for the fields. As if you just add a field outside a listing would be also collapsed as default.No?
Edit: But yes some predicate that would be form:isCollapsedOnRender; or the one you thought of (form:collapsedByDefault true;) seems good to :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
maybe if we're not sure what the logic should be, it's better to first add the feature to make it collapsible and then later add defaults that we feel work best? As the feature is optional, it shouldn't get in the way. Non-collapsed also makes the behavior the same as when the form isn't collapsible.
WDYT?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sounds good to me! Step by step 💪🏻
|
Converted to draft to prevent accidental merge |
Adds collapsible subforms, also adds the form builder form for testing
Forms can be made collapsible by adding
form:isCollapsible true(new predicate).A collapsible form can also receive a path that specifies where to find the label/value to show when the form is collapsed. This is done using for example:
form:collapsedLabelPath ( sh:name ) ;in this case, the form will follow the specified path in its source graph and take the FIRST resulting value and render it when it is closed.