-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.2k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Polish UX when saving post metadata and create supporting data structures #62383
Comments
There's a little relevant conversation happening in Slack as well. Link requires registration. |
@gziolo @SantosGuillamot Is there anyone we should ping on the code side to move this discussion forward? Maybe a PR with some data structure changes to support the granular review of post meta (as in the image below) would be good? |
From your previous comment, it seems there are three things we should/could work on:
If that's the case, I believe we can address each item individually. I would say that the first step would be to explore how to work on it and, if we get blocked, ask for help with more concrete questions. |
I think we are the code side @artemiomorales 😉 We could work on several things there, as @SantosGuillamot mention. Retrieving those fields, create the sections, add the fold/unfold behavior, etc. We also would have to check what happens when the user unselect those checks and save. Feel free to experiment and try to get the design approach, and reach out if blocked. |
Perfect, sounds like a plan. I'm interested in getting the save panel to work with the checkboxes — will look into that. |
I was checking, and we already have issues for:
The only point missing is the one to include a list of the custom fields that have been modified. We can open a pull request or issue once we work on that. Would it make sense to close this issue and rely on those ones?
Regarding this: Which part is not working now? If we talk about having one checkbox per meta field as shown in the image, I would work first on showing the list of fields instead of "Post Meta", even without having checkboxes. |
This would be the best start. |
Ok I've created a new issue here:
I hesitate slightly because those two issues, as well as the one above, all would rely on using the same supporting data structure. I'm happy to close this if we feel that makes project management cleaner, though. My inclination is to focus on #62938 to start, and we could move to the other two afterwards. |
I looked at this more closely and believe this issue is now better handled in the three more granular ones below. It turns out that they can largely be tackled individually, so I'll close this issue. |
What problem does this address?
Right now, our existing data structures and logic don't support an ideal user experience when modifying post metadata:
What is your proposed solution?
Let's think through the user experience of these scenarios holistically and refactor so that our use cases are easy to implement and understand in the codebase, as well as potentially extensible to future use cases.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: