496 fieldset #506
496 fieldset #506
Conversation
BCerki
force-pushed
the
491-alert
branch
2 times, most recently
from
d198128 to
42f6ba5
Compare
BCerki
force-pushed
the
496-fieldset
branch
from
a12035c to
d5c30d3
Compare
BCerki
force-pushed
the
496-fieldset
branch
from
d5c30d3 to
eb2b7e3
Compare
| const results = await axe(container); | ||
|
|
||
| expect(results).toHaveNoViolations(); | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we add testing for passing the user props? There are some examples in the bcgov Input component that could be useful.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've added this test to the component-library test rather than the button one. All the Button components only have the accessibility test so I'm guessing the idea was to thoroughly test the base components and then only add Button tests if the component is significantly different than the base one. If that seems like a problem I can make a tech debt card to come up with a testing strategy/team agreement
| }, | ||
| required: { | ||
| description: 'Indicates whether the field is required.', | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we add the fullWidth prop here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm going to make a tech debt card to look at this in other components--I suspect there are other stories that are missing props too
| type: 'select', | ||
| options: ['small', 'medium', 'large'], | ||
| }, | ||
| description: 'The size of the checkbox', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"input field" instead of checkbox?
| size: 'medium', | ||
| }, | ||
| staticProps: ['fullWidth'], | ||
| forwardProps: ['size', 'variant', 'disabled', 'required', 'fullWidth'], |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The fullWidth version has some ugly spacing, but since we're going to need to do proper styling once we have designs anyway, I think it's okay for now
Fixes #496
Proposed Changes