Closed (won't fix)
Project:
Drupal core
Version:
8.0.x-dev
Component:
field_ui.module
Priority:
Minor
Category:
Task
Assigned:
Unassigned
Reporter:
Created:
29 Dec 2012 at 09:45 UTC
Updated:
29 Jul 2014 at 21:42 UTC
Jump to comment: Most recent file
Comments
Comment #1
yesct commentedIt's ok if there is some field after the translation field.
It's ok when there is no content in a field yet.
Here is the problem: missing whitespace
Comment #2
yesct commentedThis just makes the "has no field settings" line a paragraph.
I'm thinking maybe instead/in addition to put the translation enable/disable in a div.
Comment #3
yesct commentedrelated #1876134: "has no field settings" does not make sense (follow-up to Adding new fields leads to a confusing "Field settings" form)
I wonder if the translation setting should be added to the form in a way that it's picked up as a field setting (so it does not say there are no field settings). To be discussed in that related issue probably.
Comment #4
fenda commented@YesCT: Looking at your patch you've put p tags within the #markup. I was always wondering if there is any coding standards on if these should be in #prefix and #suffix for render arrays? I looked through core and there doesn't seem to be any consistency.
Comment #5
yesct commented@drupaljoe Good question. I'm not sure I know how to find the answer... unless we can find the issue that added the ability to use the prefix/suffix/markup and see if there is some guidance there.
The other common answer to thing like this is: check and see what other parts of core are doing.... grep votes... :) [edit to use code tag]
7:
grep -R "<p>" * | grep prefix | grep -v patch | grep -v interdiff | wc -l18:
grep -R "<p>" * | grep "</p>" | grep markup | grep -v patch | grep -v interdiff | wc -lMore seriously, I dont know the right approach here, I'm just getting the ball rolling.
Comment #6
yesct commentedComment #7
tstoecklerThe current approach is absolutely fine and makes sense. I'm not sure #markup even supports #prefix and #suffix, at least I'm pretty sure that in D7 it doesn't. I didn't actually review the change in detail so not setting to RTBC.
Comment #8
gábor hojtsyIs this going to irrelevant with #1876134: "has no field settings" does not make sense (follow-up to Adding new fields leads to a confusing "Field settings" form)? Not?
Comment #9
yesct commentedRight.
Comment #10
gábor hojtsyPostponed?
Comment #11
yesct commentedheh.