Various UX improvements

Created on 16 July 2025, 15 days ago

Problem/Motivation

I presented this module's UI to many of my colleagues and gathered some feedback to improve the user experience.

Steps to reproduce

Proposed resolution

  • Change the action label from "Update terms" to "Update taxonomy terms"
  • Change the confirmation page title from "Which term reference fields do you want to update?" to "Which taxonomy term assignments do you want to update?"
  • On the form, for each taxonomy term field presented, indicate what content types(s) the field applies to. This should especially be helpful if you have selected many nodes of different content types.
  • On the form, remove the sentence "Select actions and values for each field and these will be applied only to the content items that have that field.". Our users found this redundant and/or confusing.
  • On the form, change the option "Replace with selected term(s)" to "Replace all with selected term(s)"
  • On the form, change the option "Clear existing value" to "Clear all existing term(s)"
  • On the form, for each taxonomy field presented, add an option "Do nothing" and have it selected by default.
  • On the form, change the autocomplete field to a multi-select field. (This one we should make configurable. We would further enhance this with a JS library to improve the multi-select, but I imagine most sites won't and the standard multi-select is not very usable)

Remaining tasks

User interface changes

API changes

Data model changes

✨ Feature request
Status

Active

Version

2.1

Component

Code

Created by

πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡ΈUnited States bkosborne New Jersey, USA

Live updates comments and jobs are added and updated live.
Sign in to follow issues

Comments & Activities

  • Issue created by @bkosborne
  • πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡ΈUnited States bkosborne New Jersey, USA
  • πŸ‡ͺπŸ‡ΈSpain fjgarlin

    Those are all great suggestions. All of them, except for the last one, seem pretty quick and straightforward.

    I suggest doing all of them except the last one on this issue, and do the last one on a separate issue, so as not to block the quick and easy changes.

  • πŸ‡ͺπŸ‡ΈSpain fjgarlin

    Or if you still want to do it via one issue, then do it in two separate MRs. I'm happy either way.

  • @bkosborne opened merge request.
  • πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡ΈUnited States bkosborne New Jersey, USA

    Agreed. I'll split that out into a separate issue. I may not even do it here. May be pretty easy with a form alter for our own use case.

  • πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡ΈUnited States bkosborne New Jersey, USA

    Ready for review. Sorry, the changes look bigger than they are because I had to refactor how the form is constructed a bit. Now the code first gathers the list of all eligible term reference fields, then in a separate loop builds the form. This allowed me to collect the list of content types used by a field with the same name.

  • πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡ΈUnited States bkosborne New Jersey, USA

    eh, while I could do the change to select widget in a form alter, it's more complex that I'd like since we need to also load the term tree. Creating follow up to add it to the module...

  • πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡ΈUnited States bkosborne New Jersey, USA
  • πŸ‡ͺπŸ‡ΈSpain fjgarlin

    The refactoring makes sense and looks good. Tests are also happy. RTBC.

    Feel free to merge this yourself with your new admin powers πŸ™‚

  • πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡ΈUnited States bkosborne New Jersey, USA

    Thanks!

Production build 0.71.5 2024