We should add support for RDFa output in the email formatter and test that it produces the expected triples.
Part of #2034951: [META] Support and test all field formatters RDFa output.
| Comment | File | Size | Author |
|---|---|---|---|
| #25 | interdiff-2034975-18-25.txt | 903 bytes | kay_v |
| #25 | 2034975-25-email-field-test.patch | 1.78 KB | kay_v |
| #22 | interdiff-2034975-18-22.patch | 792 bytes | kay_v |
| #22 | 2034975-22-email-field-test.patch | 1.71 KB | kay_v |
| #18 | interdiff-2034975-14-18.txt | 662 bytes | krlucas |
Comments
Comment #1
linclark commentedThis just tests the text_plain formatter, which is the default when text module is enabled. Still needs test for the formatter that email defines.
Comment #2
linclark commentedThis needs to be rerolled based on changes in the base class.
Comment #3
linclark commentedRerolled and added tests for the MailToFormatter. There's also a switch from the fake URI to a real one. THis isn't really necessary until the formatters patch, but doesn't do any harm.
Comment #4
jesse.d commented#3: 2034975-03-email-field-test_includes2034977.patch queued for re-testing.
Comment #5
scor commentedThis needs reroll to incorporate #2034977: Create a base class for formatter RDFa tests.
Comment #6
kay_v commentedComment #7
kay_v commentedrenaming and re-posting patch to prepend issue number
Comment #8
scor commentedAs far as I can tell, we don't need to alter the email field formatter to support RDFa, since the wrapping element will receive the property attribute (default behavior). The test might need to be added for that though.
Comment #9
scor commentedMinor fixes needed.
The class needs to be documented, for example this is taken from the text field test:
+/**
+ * Tests the placement of RDFa in text field formatters.
+ */
+class TextFieldRdfaTest extends FieldRdfaTestBase {
The title needs to be consistent with other similar tests, for example:
'name' => 'Field formatter: text',
Comment #10
kay_v commentedcode style fixes described in #9
Comment #12
kay_v commentedfixed typo -was missing slash in comment tag (line 11)
Comment #13
scor commentedIndentation issues, should be:
(note the leading space on the second and third lines)
Comment #14
kay_v commentedspacing fix (thanks for catching!)
Comment #15
kay_v commentedComment #16
scor commentedThese lines are not needed for the purpose of this test.
Comment #17
scor commentedComment #18
krlucas commentedRemove the lines referenced in #16
Comment #19
krlucas commentedComment #20
scor commentedThanks Kelly. Patch looks good now.
Comment #21
alexpottHaving two tests here means that we have to run test setup twice. Which looks a bit unnecessary - how about a testFormatters method with two assertions?
Comment #22
kay_v commentedcombined assertions into single method per #21
Comment #24
scor commentedNeeds to be updated to say "Tests all the formatters.". Maybe also keep the comment for each assertion as well.
Comment #25
kay_v commentedcorrected general comment on method and added comment for each assertion per #24
Comment #26
kay_v commentedComment #27
scor commentedAll tests have been merged into one per #21 recommendation in #21. back to RTBC.
Comment #28
alexpottCommitted 2020cb4 and pushed to 8.x. Thanks!