- Issue created by @tstoeckler
- 🇺🇸United States smustgrave
As much of some of these would make sense I may be a -1 for such as change as it would be very disruptive
- 🇩🇪Germany tstoeckler Essen, Germany
Hmmm... can you elaborate? Not sure what you're getting at specifically.
- 🇺🇸United States smustgrave
I mean you had to alter tests for this to pass, which could break contrib modules.
Sure a lot of drupal docs, user manuals, and training will have to be written with these changes. - 🇩🇪Germany tstoeckler Essen, Germany
Well we "just" switched the entire form from a single massive select field to an elaborate multi-step workflow, so I'm a bit baffled why now adapting the labels to fit into that new workflow vs. the old select list is somehow disruptive in the context of the larger change.
- 🇩🇪Germany rkoller Nürnberg, Germany
I agree it is a disruptive change, but also a necessary one. There is actually already an issue where discussions and work happened over the course of the last few months: 📌 [PP1] Refine field descriptions Active . The issue has a broader scope since we are also refining the descriptions as well. I've quickly skimmed through the suggestions in the issue summary, and they are mostly in line with the suggestions in the current draft. Sole difference, with ✨ Use modal in add new field flow Active in and the field creation flow moving into a dialog modal, we wanted to make the dialog modal title more explicit for each step of the wizard. In consequence instead of something like
Long formatted text, the title would be called "Formatted text" (and maybe something like "Step 1 of 3:"prefixed) and the available fields would be called "Short text", "Long text", "Long text with summary" - we also disliked parenthesis within the labels which puts a toll on readability.A summary of the current state and the open to-dos can be found in #3370326-27: Refine field descriptions → . The issue itself contains a lot of information and discussion, and most of the initial thought process is contained in https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Lx7L40eRHotr5KQGn6au5WxQO3lFv19a... (there are also some more ideas for follow ups in the comments there).
If it would be ok with you @tstoeckler i would suggest, to invite you to join the discussion over in 📌 [PP1] Refine field descriptions Active (would be really valuable to get some additional feedback there - the recent discussions were solely around the regular attendees of the ux meetings) - simply to focus the effort in a single issue if that would be ok with you?
- 🇩🇪Germany tstoeckler Essen, Germany
Thanks @rkoller, I wasn't aware of that issue. Yes, totally makes sense to focus efforts there. Will see if I have some time to try dig into the issue there. But yes, let's close this then. Thanks for the heads-up! 👍️