Show field/field-storage summary instead of field type on field listings

The Needs Review Queue Bot → tested this issue. It either no longer applies to Drupal core, or fails the Drupal core commit checks. Therefore, this issue status is now "Needs work".

Apart from a re-roll or rebase, this issue may need more work to address feedback in the issue or MR comments. To progress an issue, incorporate this feedback as part of the process of updating the issue. This helps other contributors to know what is outstanding.

Consult the Drupal Contributor Guide → to find step-by-step guides for working with issues.

Rerolled #82

The last submitted patch, 99: 2458127-99.patch, failed testing. View results →

Opened an MR that applies patch #99, fixes the failed test, and added the new styling to the claro theme as well

Updating the screenshot in the issue summary with a recent screenshot that uses Claro, and shows the bundle information that was just made visible by recent commits to the MR. 😇

tim.plunkett → made their first commit to this issue’s fork.

This infra commit fixed the composer issue

I brought this up with the usability group to discuss the "Target entity type" text. I had the impression that we generally avoid using the term "entity" in the UI whenever that's possible. It seems like that is the case, and for that reason the group recommends to use "Reference type" instead.

Something else that the group suggested was looking into alternative ways of presenting the different summaries. Currently, they are displayed as a list and each item is on it's own line. However, from usability standpoint, it might be better to display them differently. Within the group there was consensus that this issue is a net win even without addressing this concern and therefore addressing these concerns could be left for a follow-up issue.

This has also reviewed by the Usability group in the past, as documented in #78. As part of this, the group had reviewed the removal of the link.

At the moment it is unclear to where the link is pointing, rendering it useless for most users. Removing the link may cause some friction for users who are who are accustomed to using the link for checking information about the field storage (i.e. cardinality). However, there is a pre-existing link to the same destination under the operations, with a much clearer link text. We may have to look into what other information users need from the field storage page as an additional follow-up.

We discussed this issue at 📌 Drupal Usability Meeting 2023-02-17 Fixed . That issue will have a link to a recording of the meeting. (See also #109.)

For the record, the attendees at the usability meeting were @AaronMcHale, @BlackBamboo, @benjifisher, @gaurav mahlawat, @lauriii, @rkoller, @shaal, and @simohell.

We specifically discussed the new text for an entity reference (ER) field. From the screenshot in the issue description → :

Entity reference
Referenced entity type: Media
Media type: Image, Video

For this issue, we would like to change "Referenced entity type" to "Reference type", as @lauriii said in #109. Either as part of this issue or as a follow-up, we would like to combine the first two lines. Some possibilities are "Media reference", "Reference: Media", or "Reference (Media)". Depending on which modules are enabled, some possibilities are two words or longer ("Taxonomy term", "Content moderation state", ...).

One guideline is to be consistent with the forms for adding a new field and for editing the field-storage settings. When adding a field, the select list has "Reference" as a group header and Content, File, Image, ... as options in that group. When editing the field-storage settings, the text is "Type of item to reference".

This seems really close but this one feature seemed off

Don't think these fields need a reference type right?

Pushed commit which should address #111 👍

#111 has been fixed so +1 from me for RTBC.

Not moving it for subsyste, framework manager, and usability review.

Think after that happens change record can be written.

Also was tagged for follow up 4 years ago if that still needs to happen.

Opened follow-up issues:

1. 📌 [PP-1] Remove unused $entity_type_manager constructor argument from \Drupal\field_ui\FieldConfigListBuilder Postponed
2. 📌 [PP-1] Some of the field summaries are excessively verbose Active

Based on #115, moving to RTBC for a framework manager review.

This issue is required by 🐛 Improve re-use an existing field user experience Fixed .

This probably needs a non FE framework manager signoff as that's where most of the changes are, but this is looking good to me. It introduces some smaller than usual fonts in the details, but the .9rem is well above the 9px needed for AA compliance. I also tried this out with Paragraphs, and paragraphs fields in content types look great, as do fields within paragraphs.

As unlikely a use case as this might be, may be worth if the CR includes info on the array returned by \Drupal\field_ui\FieldConfigListBuilder::buildHeader as it no longer returns a field_type key and now has settings_summary. I went through https://git.drupalcode.org/search to see if there's any evidence of this impacting contrib in any way, and it certainly doesn't look like it... it just seems like an easy enough base to cover.

Hiding patches since there's an MR.

Left a comment on the MR about the module stylesheet. If that's addressed with something simple like a selector change I'd say go ahead and switch back to RTBC after the change.

Addressed the feedback regarding the CSS selector.

After many high quality reviews from many excellent contributors, I've committed this to 10.1.x, and opting to not backport since it is a UI change that isn't addressing a bug.

For context: This ticket was filed two months before the release of "Avengers: Age of Ultron" and "Mad Max: Fury Road" (which I saw right after returning from Drupalcon LA). The number one movie in the US on the actual date was "The Divergent Series: Insurgent". Nice work everyone, great to see this UX improvement added to core!

bnjmnm → closed merge request !3430

Published change record