Add new standard support for subforms on pages.

Review Request #10950 — Created March 12, 2020 and submitted

chipx86
Review Board
release-4.0.x
51021eb...
reviewboard

We have a number of pages in the administration UI today that make use
of subforms, which are forms dynamically hidden or shown based on
the selection on another form control. Each one of these had to be
written manually, which made implementations inconsistent and sometimes
buggy.

This change introduces a new formal subform implementation, which we'll
be able to start using in the settings pages. There are several new
things introduced here:

  1. An -is-subform modifier on rb-c-form-fieldset, which turns a
    fieldset into a subform.

  2. Data attributes for specifying a subform group, ID, and a controller
    element ID (which is used to automatically manage subform displays).

  3. Guidance on setting both the disabled and hidden attributes to
    ensure the form's data won't be validated or sent to the server, and
    hiding the form from display and from screen readers (note that
    hidden is an HTML 5.1 attribute, which is available in all our
    supported browsers, including IE11).

  4. Support in RB.FormView for automatically setting up and managing
    subform state based on the data attributes.

  5. Standard templates for representing a form instance as a subform,
    and a dictionary of subform IDs to forms as subforms.

Upcoming changes will update other forms to use this, fixing our form
validation issues on Django 1.11.

Unit tests pass.

Made use of this to update all the existing subforms (which will be
in an upcoming change). Verified everything worked as expected.

Description From Last Updated

Col: 48 ['group1'] is better written in dot notation.

reviewbotreviewbot

Col: 48 ['group2'] is better written in dot notation.

reviewbotreviewbot

Col: 41 ['group1'] is better written in dot notation.

reviewbotreviewbot

Col: 51 ['subform1'] is better written in dot notation.

reviewbotreviewbot

Col: 41 ['group1'] is better written in dot notation.

reviewbotreviewbot

Col: 51 ['subform2'] is better written in dot notation.

reviewbotreviewbot

Col: 41 ['group2'] is better written in dot notation.

reviewbotreviewbot

Col: 51 ['subform3'] is better written in dot notation.

reviewbotreviewbot

Col: 41 ['group2'] is better written in dot notation.

reviewbotreviewbot

Col: 51 ['subform4'] is better written in dot notation.

reviewbotreviewbot

Should be "Render the view"

daviddavid

Should this really be set to have a default, since options.group is required? Perhaps we should remove the default value ...

daviddavid

controllerGroup?

daviddavid
Checks run (1 failed, 1 succeeded)
flake8 passed.
JSHint failed.

JSHint

chipx86
david
  1. 
      
  2. Should be "Render the view"

  3. Should this really be set to have a default, since options.group is required? Perhaps we should remove the default value and then assert on options?

    1. I was just aiming to make the errors fully about the parameters (if you provide a blank options, you're not doing any better), but I can change that.

  4. controllerGroup?

    1. Oops, search/replace issue. Was changing "category" to "group". Missed fixing this one.

  5. 
      
chipx86
david
  1. Ship It!
  2. 
      
chipx86
Review request changed

Status: Closed (submitted)

Change Summary:

Pushed to release-4.0.x (ea878e6)
Loading...